AN ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS OF
William Howard Thomas for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in
Education presented on August 14. 1992
.
Title:
A Study of the
Effects of an Extended Transfer Student Orientation Course on
Transfer Student Academic Achievement.
Abstract approved:
Redacted for Privacy
Forrest Gathercoal
In the process of adjusting to a new institutional environ-
ment, transfer students will often experience difficulties and
these difficulties may limit their academic potential.
Can an
institution create a formal process which can help the transfer
student adjust to the institutional environment?
This study is an
examination of a program--an extended transfer student orientation course modeled after the freshman extended orientation course
which was developed at the University of South Carolina.
Grade
Point Average (GPA) was used to study the effects of the course on
academic achievement (academic integration as measured by GPA,
retention and graduation rates).
This experimental study was conducted at Oregon State University, a northwestern land-grant institution.
The study was
conducted with two groups of newly-admitted transfer students.
The experimental group (N-80) consisted of those self-selected
transfer students enrolled in the extended transfer student orien-
tation course, while the comparison group (N-80) consisted of
transfer students, picked at random, who were not enrolled in the
course.
The two groups were studied after the Fall 1988 extended
transfer student orientation course.
The demographic data revealed that a majority of the
students transferred from in-state institutions, tended to enter
from two-year institutions and four-year institutions.
This study
showed no evidence that the extended transfer student orientation
course had an effect on academic achievement.
A Study of the Effects of an
Extended Transfer Student Orientation Course
on Transfer Student Academic Achievement
by
William Howard Thomas
A THESIS
submitted to
Oregon State University
in partial fulfillment of
the requirement for the
degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Completed August 14, 1992
Commencement June 1993
`Copyright by William Howard Thomas
1992
All Rights Reserved
APPROVED:
Redacted for Privacy
Professor of Education in Charge of Major
Redacted for Privacy
Director of the School of Education
Redacted for Privacy
Dean of Graduatgl School
Date thesis is presented
Typed by Jonnie M. Newman for
August 14, 1992
William Howard Thomas
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank the members of my graduate committee
who functioned as representatives of the larger educational community, which provided me with the training and the desire to
undertake this project.
This thanks is extended particularly to
Dr. Robert Rice, the person who had the vision to see the need for
the extended transfer student orientation course.
His help is
very much appreciated.
I also thank my friends, who always believed that I could
succeed at Oregon State University.
Out of all these individuals,
it is to Dr. Lawrence F. Griggs and the staff of the Educational
Opportunities Program that I owe the most.
My family may not have known all the ins and outs of this
process, but my family had faith in the eventual outcome.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Statement of the Problem
Study Purpose
Objectives
Research Questions
Limitations of the Study
Definition of Terms
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Transfer Students
Adjustment Difficulties Encountered by
Transfer Students
Academic Problems of Transfer Students
Retention Difficulties of Transfer
Students
Transfer Students' Needs
Programming for Transfer Students
Orientation for Transfer Students
Extended Orientation Programs
A General Summary of the SRC Item Differences
Among the Groups
Traditional
SOAP Group
HIED 101x Group
HIED 102x Group
An Analysis of the Academic Performance of the
Orientation-Related Groups
GPA
Honors Status
Probationary Status
Retention Rates
Summary of Academic Performance Findings
Survey Of Related Literature
Changing Roles in Higher Education
Current Research on Transfer Students
Programming for Transfer Students
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN
The Population
Experimental Group
Comparison Group
Experimental Treatment
Rationale For HIED 202
Objectives of HIED 202
Ease
1
1
4
5
6
6
7
8
11
11
11
14
14
17
28
30
31
32
39
39
39
40
41
41
41
42
43
43
44
45
45
55
60
66
66
67
67
68
70
71
72
TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued
CHAPTER III - continued
RESEARCH DESIGN - continued
Procedure
Design
Design Matrix
Methods of Analysis
Hypotheses
1.
Null Hypothesis
2.
Null Hypothesis
Null Hypothesis
3.
4.
Null Hypothesis
74
75
76
82
83
84
84
85
85
CHAPTER IV
STUDY RESULTS
Transfer Student Descriptive Information
Sample Size
Gender
Mean Age
Ages
Ages of Females and Males
Area of Origin
Former College Enrollment
Class Standing
Enrollment by College
Entering Grade Point Averages (GPA's)
Housing Status
Ethnic Groups
Demographic Data Summary
Hypotheses Testing
Null Hypothesis
1.
Null Hypothesis
2.
3.
Null Hypothesis
Null Hypothesis
4.
102
107
116
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Hypotheses Testing
Decline in Grade Point Average
Grade Point Average (GPA)
Retention of Transfer Students
Transfer Student Graduation Rates
Conclusion
Written Comments From Participants
Recommendations for Further Research
118
118
118
119
120
120
121
122
122
123
132
86
86
86
87
88
88
89
90
92
93
94
94
95
96
97
99
99
99
TABLE OF CONTENTS - continued
REFERENCES
134
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Directory of Community Colleges in Oregon
APPENDIX B
Map of Counties of Community Colleges in Oregon
144
144
145
145
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page,
1.
Model of the Undergraduate Dropout Process
23
2.
A Conceptual Schema for Dropout from College
24
3.
A Model of Student Departure
25
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
1.
Two- and Four-Year College Enrollment
13
2.
Significant Differences Among Groups on the SRC
Sub-categories
38
3.
Grade Point Average for Orientation-Related Groups
42
4.
Percentage of Participants With GPA's Greater Than 3.5
42
5.
Percentage of Participants With GPA's Less Than 2.00
43
6.
Retention Percentage of Participants
44
7.
1988 Admissions From Community Colleges to Oregon
State University Status at End of First Year
54
8.
Sample Size
87
9.
Gender
88
10.
Mean Age
89
11.
Ages
90
12.
Ages of Females
91
13.
Ages of Males
91
14.
Area of Origin
92
15.
Former College Enrollment
93
16.
Class Standing
94
17.
Enrollment by College
95
18.
Entering Grade Point Averages (CPA's)
96
19.
Housing Status
97
20.
Ethnic Groups
98
LIST OF TABLES Continued
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the
Entering Grade Point Average (GPA) for the
Experimental Group
100
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the
Entering Grade Point Average (GPA) for the
Comparison Group
101
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the
Academic Year 1988 for the Comparison and
Experimental Groups Compared - Comparison Group
103
24.
Experimental Group 1988
103
25.
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the
Academic Year 1989 for the Experimental and
Comparison Groups Compared - Comparison Group 1989
104
26.
Experimental Group 1989
105
27.
Comparison Group 1990
106
28.
Experimental Group 1990
106
29.
Retention of Experimental and Comparison Groups
by Percent
108
Retention of Experimental and Comparison Groups
by Number of Students
109
Percentage of Experimental Group with Grade Point
Averages (CPA's) Over 3.50 and 3.57
111
Percentage of Comparison Group with Grade Point
Averages (CPA's) Over 3.50 and 3.57
112
33.
Percentage of Experimental Group Below 2.00 (GPA)
113
34.
Percentage of Comparison Group Below 2.00 (GPA)
114
35.
Graduation Rates of Experimental Group Students
116
36.
Graduation Rates of Comparison Group Students
116
21.
22.
23.
30.
31.
32.
A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF AN EXTENDED TRANSFER STUDENT
ORIENTATION COURSE ON TRANSFER STUDENT ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Students today are challenging the previous assumption that
individuals enter college as freshmen and remain at one institution until obtaining a degree.
The pattern of student matricula-
tion in higher education has become less predictable, as many
students transfer from two-year institutions to four-year institutions and from four-year institutions to different four-year institutions.
Students move among institutions to find a specific
program, to fit into a supportive environment, or to pursue upperdivision courses.
According to Sheldon and Grafton (1982) the transfer student
population is becoming an increasingly diverse and complex group.
Research on transfer students has been limited because of vast inconsistencies in defining transfer students.
There is no national
association or clearinghouse which acts as an advocate for transfer students.
The information that is known comes from institu-
tional or state studies which have largely focused on community
college transfer students.
Higher education does not have a com-
plete picture of transfers; however, one will find that some
trends are apparent.
2
There are several unique problems faced by transfer students
which have been shown to restrict their success:
1.
When two-year and four-year students transfer, they
commonly experience a drop in grades--an average of
half a grade point in the first term (Lenning, 1977;
Cross, 1981; Sheldon, 1982; Payne, Ridenour and Wood,
1988).
2.
While many transfer students gradually recover from
this low point, this early difficulty may limit their
admission to competitive programs where native students (those who enter as freshmen) have a decided
edge in cumulative grades (Lunneborg and Lunneborg,
1976; Desler, 1986; Johnson, 1987).
3.
Two-year transfer students have uneven educational
attendance patterns, they exhibit a lack of direction
as to educational goals and they lack educational
motivation (Cross, 1981; Lunneborg and Lunneborg,
1976).
4.
The expectations of transfer students for the
experiences they have in college and the resulting
outcomes have been found to be unrealistic and
exaggerated (Buckley, 1971).
5.
The pre-entry characteristics that kept the two-year
transfer students from direct entry to the university
from high school may still interfere with upper-
3
division performance, and this may place them at a
disadvantage in the new environment (Cross, 1981;
Sheldon, 1982; Transfer Education, 1984).
The attrition rates of transfer students could be attributed
to many of the same factors that limit the success of some entering freshmen (Johnson, 1987).
It was suggested by Riesman (1981)
that transfer students have the common experience of being freshmen twice.
According to Knoell and Medsker (1964), transfer students
were commonly overlooked when four-year institutions planned
orientation programs, offered counseling services to new students,
provided adequate and appropriate advising at the first registration and invited student participation in social and extracurricular activities.
There was a general lack of concern for the
needs and interests of the transfer students.
Four-year institutions have gradually come to realize that
some two-year and four-year transfer students have a difficult
time succeeding in the four-year institutional environment.
Before adequate programs can be established to provide
services for transfer students, the senior institutions must
gather information on the characteristics of their transfer
groups.
They need to know how many students transfer annually,
how old they are, at what class levels they are admitted, from
what colleges they transferred, their sex and their interests.
4
One formal process that is increasingly being used to
enhance student success is the extended orientation course;
however, the course has usually focused on freshman populations.
The extended orientation course has rarely been evaluated within a
theoretical framework and, thus, its value in altering specific
success variables remains dubious.
There is a need to know
whether an extended orientation course can affect success
variables for transfer students.
According to Rice and Thomas (1989), studies conducted on
extended orientation courses rarely address their effect upon the
specific factors involved in student success, and such studies
frequently have not been theoretically based.
Statement of the Problem
Transfer students experience considerable difficulties in
the new institutional environment.
The central problem is whether
or not institutions can create a formal process which can ameliorate deficiencies within success factors for transfer students.
One formal process, which usually focuses on freshman populations
and is increasingly being used to enhance transfer student success, is the extended transfer student orientation course.
The
extended transfer student orientation course has rarely been evaluated within a theoretical framework; its value in altering speci-
5
fic success variables (academic achievement) remains dubious.
It
is unknown whether or not the extended transfer student orientation course can have an effect on academic achievement for transfer students.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether or not a
significant difference exists between the experimental group
(N =80) consisting of those self-selected transfer students en-
rolled in the extended transfer students orientation course at
Oregon State University and the comparison group (N-80) consisting
of transfer students, picked at random, who were not enrolled in
the course, with respect to academic achievement (academic integration as measured by GPA, retention and graduation rates).
If
differences exist, what are the nature and extent of the differences?
Study Purpose
The purpose of this study is to measure the effect of an
extended orientation course on two-year and four-year transfer
students to determine if such a course can positively enhance
transfer student academic achievement at Oregon State University,
and to collect descriptive data on the institution's transfer
student population.
6
Objectives
1.
To determine the effect of an extended orientation
course on variables associated with student academic
achievement.
2.
This study will describe some of the basic demographics of the transfer student population at the
studied institution.
Research Questions
1.
Does participation in the course affect transfer
student academic integration as measured by the three
indicators of academic achievement (GPA, retention and
graduation rate)?
a.
Do transfer students traditionally show declines
in Grade Point Average during their first term
after entering Oregon State University?
b.
Following this drop, do the transfer students'
Grade Point Averages gradually increase?
c.
What are the effects of transfer orientation
classes upon transfer student GPA?
d.
What are the effects of transfer orientation
classes upon transfer student retention?
7
e.
What are the effects of transfer orientation
classes upon transfer student graduation rates?
Limitations of the Study
Within the transfer student orientation course structure are
factors which limit the ability to generalize the findings of this
study:
1.
Students in the experimental group (those enrolled in
the Transfer Student Orientation Course) were selfselected.
These students' characteristics and motiva-
tions may be different from those of students not
enrolled in the course (the comparison group).
2.
Students in the comparison group (those not enrolled
in the Transfer Student Orientation Course) were
randomly selected in late August 1988, prior to the
Fall term starting date in late September.
The late
enrollees were excluded, and their characteristics and
motivations may differ from those of early enrollees.
3.
Oregon State University, a land-grant school, may enroll a student population not comparable to those at
liberal arts colleges or urban institutions previously
used as transfer student study sites.
8
4.
The content of the Transfer Student Orientation Course
focused primarily on a developmental approach and was
limited to 20 contact hours.
5.
The effects of the experimental treatment on academic
achievement will be assessed after one term.
6.
A small number of the transfer students in the experimental group were at-risk transfer students; the study
had no control because the students were selfselected.
A small number of the transfer students in
the comparison group were at-risk transfer students;
the study had no control because the students were
picked at random from a selected group, using a system
of match and random selection.
Definition of Terms
In order to attain precision and clarity of meaning, the
following definitions will be used:
Academic Achievement:
Academic integration as measured by GPA,
retention and graduation rates.
Academic Integration:
The extent to which a transfer student
meets the academic demands of the four-year institution
9
through intellectual growth, grade performance and faculty
relationships.
Commitment:
The degree the transfer student is committed to goal
attainment (graduation) and to the institution.
Community College:
A public two-year institution offering lower-
division credits in which the associate degree is the
highest degree (Cohen and Brawer, 1982).
Extended Orientation Course:
A program designed to promote
student success by attempting to foster social and academic
integration in small group seminar format.
The extended
orientation course was developed by John Gardner at the
University of South Carolina.
Fit:
Moral and social interaction, meaningful contact between
the student and the faculty, development of relationships
between students and those who care about them and the responsiveness of the institutions to the needs the students
feel (Lenning, Beal, and Sauer, 1980, p. 21).
Grade Point Average:
A measure of scholastic performance over a
set of courses, obtained by dividing the sum of the grade
points earned by the total number of hours of course work
attempted in the set for which GPA is assigned.
Institutional Experience:
Opportunities for transfer students to
interact with academic and social systems on the four-year
campus in both formal and informal situations.
Intentions or Goals:
Level and type of education and occupation
desired by the transfer student.
10
Native Student:
A college student who began post-secondary educa-
tion at a four-year college or university and persisted
at the same institution.
Native student is a term used at
Oregon State University by the Office of the Registrar.
Personal Goals:
The level of importance attributed by the
transfer student to life tasks of family, self and career.
Pre-Entry Attributes:
Family background, personal attributes,
skills, value orientation, and pre-college educational
experience and achievements that students bring with them to
the college environment.
Social Integration:
The frequency and quality of interaction with
extracurricular activities, peer groups, as well as the kind
and compatibility of transfer student peer group lifestyle
and values.
Stop-outs:
Students who interrupt their educational programs for
other than academic reasons.
Transfer Students:
Individuals who move between post-secondary
institutions that include two-year colleges and four-year
colleges.
11
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
The review of literature focuses on six areas:
transfer
students, adjustment difficulties encountered by transfer
students, programming for transfer students, a general summary of
the SRC item differences among the groups, an analysis of the
academic performance of the orientation-related groups and survey
of related literature.
Transfer Students
Transfer students are an integral part of higher education.
They have been present in American colleges since the colonial
period (Brubacher and Rudy, 1976).
Their number is uncertain, but
it is estimated that 42 percent of the nation's 12.3 million
students leave their first institution for another (U.S. Dept. of
Education, 1977).
According to the Oregon State University Office
of the Registrar (1990), Fall 1990 Oregon State University transfer student population was 3,519, which was 22 percent of total
enrollment.
The transfer population can be described comprising at least
five separate groups.
They include:
12
1.
Articulated vertical transfers who move in regular
sequence from high school to community college to
university.
2.
Lateral transfers who move from one senior institution
to another.
3.
International transfers who transfer from a foreign
institution.
4.
Willingham (1974) categorized three of these groups.
They include:
a.
Articulated transfers:
Students who move from a
two-year college into the upper division of a
four-year college program.
b.
Traditional horizontal transfers:
Students who
move from one four-year college to another because of family migration, changes in educational plans, dissatisfaction or financial
constraints.
c.
Non-traditional transfers:
Students who do not
follow the usual patterns, including adults who
have been out of college for some years.
5.
Lee (1982) included reverse transfers:
Students who
leave a four-year college to attend a two-year
college.
Hall (1992) observed that the Department of Education
statistics show that more than 5.5 million students attended two-
13
year colleges full-time last year (1991), an increase of 103
percent during the last decade.
Four-year schools posted only a
33 percent rise in the same period.
Because of the current state
of the economy, students are finding education a bargain at these
smaller schools.
Because of the larger populations at two-year
colleges, there will be larger numbers of transfer students to
four-year schools (see Table 1).
TABLE 1
Two- and Four-year College Enrollment
Two-year
Year
Four-year
1970
2.319
6.262
1975
3.970
7.215
1980
4.526
7.571
1985
4.531
7.716
1990
5.181
8.529
1995 *
5.597
8.580
* projected
Source:
Values are in millions
U.S. Department of Education 1992
14
Adjustment Difficulties Encountered by
Transfer Students
A review of the literature concerned with the transfer
students' academic achievement at two-year and four-year
institutions showed that many investigations have been conducted
in this area.
The following review of literature will focus on
academic problems of transfer students, retention difficulties of
transfer students and transfer students' needs.
Academic Problems of Transfer Students
During Fall 1984 Anderson and Polillo (1987) conducted a
study to compare the academic progress of 835 two-year college
transfers, senior college transfers and continuing juniors
(native) at University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), as measured
by mean Grade Point Average (GPA), academic status and continued
enrollment consistently through two years after transfer.
Study
findings (based on data of two-year college transfers, 540 fouryear college transfers and 4,588 native students) included the
following:
1)
Two years after transfer, approximately 38 percent of
the two-year college transfers and 39 percent of the
four-year college transfers had graduated, as had 58
percent of the native juniors.
15
2)
Two- and four-year college transfer students had
similar pre-transfer GPA's (3.28 and 3.20, respectively), while native juniors had an accumulated lowerdivision GPA of 2.98.
3)
Both two- and four-year college transfer groups
experienced a first-term drop in mean GPA, with the
two-year group dropping .61 and the four-year group
dropping .32.
4)
In the fourth semester of study, the two-year college
transfers still enrolled had achieved a mean GPA of
2.93, while the four-year college transfers and native
students had achieved GPA's of 3.04 and 3.05, respectively.
The four-year college transfers and native
students show a .06 and .07 difference, compared to
the two-year college transfers.
5)
Two years after transfer, eight percent of the twoyear college group and four percent of the four-year
college group had dropped out and had not re-enrolled.
6)
Native juniors, four-year college transfers and twoyear college transfers ranked in descending order,
respectively, on mean GPA in almost all of the 12
subject areas studied during the two-year period.
16
Anderson and Polillo (1988) conducted a study during Fall
1985 to compare the academic progress of two-year college transfers, senior college transfers and continuing sophomores and
juniors (native students) at the University of Illinois at Chicago
(UIC), as measured by mean Grade Point Average (GPA), academic
status, graduation, and continued enrollment through two years
after transfer.
Study findings (based on data on 1,445 two-year
college transfers, 1,201 transfers from senior colleges and 1,331
native students) included the following:
1)
In 1986, 43 percent of the transfer students and 80
percent of the native students were continuing on
clear or probationary status or had graduated from
UIC.
2)
Six percent of the two-year college transfers and 10
percent of the senior college transfers graduated
within two years after entering UIC.
3)
The two-year college transfers entered UIC with a mean
pre-transfer GPA of 3.87, compared to mean GPA's of
3.67 for the senior college transfers and 3.66 for the
native students.
4)
Both two- and four-year college transfers experienced
reduction in GPA after their first term at UIC, and
the two-year college group never recovered their pretransfer GPA.
17
5)
By the end of the second year after transfer, 29
percent of the two-year college transfers and 22
percent of the senior college transfers had been
dropped or left while on probation.
Buckley (1971) and Donato (1973) state that two-year
transfer students' expectations of the four-year college prior to
matriculation were exaggerated and incongruent with the actual intellectual and non-intellectual climate, thus requiring considerable adjustment on the part of the students.
Retention Difficulties of Transfer Students
Graham (1987) describes a study which contrasted the
persistence rates of two-year college transfer students with those
of native university students over a six-year period.
Graham in-
dicates that transfer students had lower persistence rates than
native students during their second and third terms, although
rates for the fourth term showed no differences.
Pascarella (1982) covered background characteristics
(including family background, individual attributes and pre-
college characteristics) which interact with each other and are
expected to influence both goal commitment (graduation) and
institutional commitment.
In the academic system, goal commitment
leads to higher grade performance and intellectual development,
18
which leads to academic integration and, in turn - in circular
fashion, results in even greater goal commitment.
reduces the probability of dropping out.
Goal commitment
In the social system,
institutional commitment is expected to produce peer group and
faculty interaction, which leads to social integrations and, in
turn, increases institutional commitment, which is also expected
to reduce the probability of dropping out.
Beginning in the early 1960's, attrition researchers began
to apply theory to their work, namely the "college/fit" theory
popularized by Pace and Stern (1958).
The "college/fit" theory,
simply put, is that the more congruence there is between the
student's values, goals and attitudes and those of the college,
the more likely it is the student will persist at that college.
Astin (1964), testing the validity of the "college/fit"
theory in attrition research, concluded that students are likely
to select a college that corresponds with personal characteristics.
Barger and Hall (1964) compared 916 dropouts to 2,744
non-dropouts at the University of Florida and concluded that in
order for students to actualize their ability more adequately may
entail a better matching of students with college enrollments.
Feldman and Newcomb (1969), in their comprehensive effort The
Impact of College on Students, concluded that the congruence
between the needs, interests and abilities of the student and the
demands, rewards, and constraints of the particular college setting explained retention.
19
Holland (1973) developed his theory of vocational choice,
which was similar in concept and construct to Stern's theory of
"college/fit."
Holland theorized that people's vocational and
college major choices are expressions of their personalities.
Chickering (1974) investigated the "college/fit" theory
through the study of students' living arrangements.
He concluded
that retention was increased by living on campus, especially by
living in fraternity houses; next to fraternities, dormitories
offered the most supportive environments.
Cope and Hannah (1975),
in Revolving College Doors, concluded that dropping out is an
interaction between an individual and an institution.
Astin
(1975A), in Preventing Students from Dropping Out, found that in
general persistence is enhanced if the student attends an institution in which the social background of other students resemble
his or her own social background.
Spady (1970) developed the first full-blown theoretical
model for studying the attrition process.
Spady combined the
ideas of Stern's "college/fit" theory with those of Durkhiem's
(1961) suicide theory.
Durkhiem observed that suicide is more
likely to occur when individuals are not sufficiently integrated
into the fabric of society.
His idea, borrowed by Spady, was that
shared group values and friendship support are expected to reduce
suicide and, by analogy, increase retention.
Spady, using this theory, developed an explanatory sociological model of the dropout process.
He first identified back-
20
ground characteristics that are important to the retention
process; specifically family background, academic potential,
ability
and SES.
Next, from Durkhiem, he identified normative
congruence and friendship support as important variables.
He then
added the college-specific variables of grade performance and
intellectual development.
All of these factors, according to
Spady's Model, lead to social integration, which is expected to
increase student satisfaction, commitment and retention (Spady,
1970).
The model, as proposed by Spady, accommodates complex interactions among students' abilities, attitudes, expectations, dispositions, habits and interests and the expectations and demands of
fellow students, faculty, administrators and the curriculum.
Ac-
cording to Spady (1970), if discrepancies between the student and
the environment are not too great, the student should be assimilated and accepted into the academic and social systems, and this
should increase the chance of student retention at the institution.
The structure of the model (see Figure 1) consists of five
independent variables, four of which (normative congruence,
friendship support, intellectual development and grade performance) influence the fifth, social integration.
social integration and dropping out is indirect.
The link between
Intervening are
two variables that flow from the integration process:
satisfac-
tion with one's college experiences and a commitment to a social
21
system.
Spady added these two variables on the assumption that
one's satisfaction with the college experience depends upon the
available social, as well as academic, rewards; and that sustaining one's commitment to the college requires both a sense of integration into the system and a sufficient number of positive rewards (Spady, 1970).
Tinto (1975) developed a model of attrition and empirical
studies.
Tinto's theoretical model, diagrammed in Figure 2,
argues that the process of dropping out from college can be viewed
as a longitudinal process of interactions between the individual
and the academic and social systems of the college during which a
person's experiences in those systems (as measured by his normative and structural integration) continually modify his goal and
institutional commitment in ways which lead to persistence and/or
various forms of dropout.
According to Tinto's model, the aca-
demic system is divided into informal and formal components.
Ac-
cording to Tinto, the formal element is the academic performance
of the student -- grades and intellectual growth being the primary
measures.
The informal component is the frequency and quality of
faculty-student interactions in and out of the classroom (see
Figures 2 and 3).
According to Tinto's (1975) model, the social system also
has formal and informal components.
The extracurricular acti-
22
vities and social functions organized by the institution comprise
the formal elements.
The informal interactions with peer groups
in daily living situations, study groups and personal needs are
measured by the congruence of values and goals, the ease of making
friends and the support of other students (see Figures 2 and 3).
Figure 1.
Model of the Undergraduate Dropout Process
(Spady, 1970)
Grade
Performance
Dropout
Intellectual
Academic
Potential
Decision
Development
Family
Background
-
Normative
Congruence
Friendship
Support
Social
Integration
Satisfaction
t
Institutional
Commitment
Figure 2.
A Conceptual Schema for Dropout from College
(Tinto, 1975)
Commitments
Academic System
E
Family
Background
Goal
7
Commitments
Grade
Performance
Academic
Integration
Intellectual
Development
Commitment
Goal
Commitment
I
Individual
Dropout
Decisions
Attributes
Institutional
Pre-College
Schooling
Commitment
Ai
kPeer-Group
Arl
Interactions
Faculty
Interactions
Social System
1
Institutional
Commitment
Figure 3.
A Model of Student Departure
(Tinto, 1987)
PRE ENTRY
ATTRIBUTES
GOALS
COMMITMENTS (Ti)
GOALS
PERSONAL
NORMATIVE
INTEGRATION
INSTITUTIONAL
EXPERIENCES
OUTCOME
COMMITMENTS (To
ACADEMIC SYSTEM
FORMAL
ACADEMIC
PERFORMANCE
ACADEMIC
INTEGRATION
I
FACULTY I STAFF
INTENTIONS
INT FRACTIONS
INTENTIONS
INFORMAL
GOAL
a
INSTITUTIONAL
COMMITMENTS
GOAL
r
FORMAL
EX! RACuRniCuLAR
ACTIVITIES
I
PEER GROUP
INTERACTIONS
INFORMAL
so:tAt SYSTEM
TIME (T1
H
SOCIAL
INTEGRATION
..,/?ri
INSTITUTIONAL
COMMITMENTS
EXTERNAL
COMMITMENTS
1
DEPARTURE
DECISION
26
Terenzini and Pascarella's (1978) test of Tinto's model was
a cross-sectional study using a sample of 378 students (representing a 76 percent response rate).
Employing discriminant analysis
they were able to explain 24.6 percent of the variance in the
model.
Social and academic integration were found to be influen-
tial in the attrition process, with social integration being the
most important.
Overall, the results supported the validity of
the model.
In their test of the model, Terenzini and Pascarella (1980)
found evidence that faculty contact played a more significant role
in the attrition process than Tinto had asserted.
In order to
examine this role further, Pascarella and Terenzini (1979A & B),
in a longitudinal study of 536 freshmen (representing a 53 percent
response rate), employed discriminant analysis to investigate the
pattern of relationships between different types of studentfaculty interactions beyond the classroom and persistence during
the freshman year.
Evidence was found to support the aspect of
Tinto's model, which asserts that informal student-faculty contact
along six dimensions was found to discriminate between those
students who voluntarily withdrew and those who persisted.
These
dimensions were defined by the following:
1)
to get basic information and advice about academic
programs;
2)
to discuss matters related to future careers;
3)
to help resolve a disturbing personal problem;
27
4)
to discuss intellectual or course-related matters;
5)
to discuss a campus issue or problem; and
6)
to socialize informally.
The dimensions of discussing intellectual and course matters and
discussing career concerns contributed most to discrimination.
Munro (1981) used path analysis to test Tinto's model with a
sample of 6,018 drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of the
high school class of 1972.
years.
The study covered a period of four
It did not differentiate between transfers and permanent
dropouts.
The results did support the validity of Tinto's model.
Fourteen percent of the variance in dropout behavior was accounted
for.
Heilbrun (1964) found that dropouts expressed a lower need
for achievement.
Robinson (1967) suggested that dropouts were
more dependent and less able to manage things on their own.
Cope
and Hannah (1975) concluded that there was definitely no dropout
personality.
Background traits were found to have only an indirect effect
on persistence.
Academic integration had a strong effect on per-
sistence, but social integration had little effect.
Goal commit-
ment was found to have the strongest effect on persistence.
Demitroff (1974) found that stop-outs and dropouts lacked
clear career or personal goals.
Johnson (1987) found that a
strong relationship existed between transfer students' intention
to remain in college and actual persistence.
28
Transfer Students' Needs
Studies of student satisfaction have continued in a bestguess-at-the-moment approach.
In these descriptive studies,
satisfaction has been defined in various ways.
For example,
Aitken (1982) and Babbitt and Burbach (1985) take the term to mean
student acceptance of academic programs and living conditions.
Bean and Metzner (1985) have described satisfaction as "the degree
to which a student enjoys the role of being a student and reports
a lack of boredom with college courses."
Nafziger, Holland and
Gottfredson (1975) defined a satisfied student as one who is a
"typical student at his/her college and (has) a personality
pattern which is both consistent and well defined."
Astin (1974,
1978), after examining overall student satisfaction in a national
sample of university students from 194 institutions, concluded
that their overall satisfaction could be measured.
Astin also
identified specific facets of satisfaction that could be measured,
including teaching, curriculum, facilities, career preparation,
extracurricular activities and administrative services.
He found
that little variance in student satisfaction could be accounted
for by entering characteristics, institutional characteristics and
measure of student involvement (1974).
The following aspects,
according to Astin, did have substantial effects of satisfaction:
1.
Quality of instruction.
2.
Contacts with faculty and fellow students (e.g.,
29
Pascarella (1980) has suggested that faculty and peer
contacts has the greatest positive effect and adds
significantly to overall satisfaction).
Intellectual environment.
3.
McKeachie (1979) observed that "teachers may be differentially effective for different students" (p. 360).
Palmer,
Carlinger and Romen (1978), in generalizing the results of their
study, drew attention to the fact that "the results might be
different for two different departments, for students taking an
upper-level course, for different types of students or for instructors at different universities" (p. 862).
It may be reason-
able to ask if different teaching styles have different effects on
different groups of students.
Chickering (1969) and Spady (1970)
found that student-faculty informal interaction has a direct influence on academic performance.
Handel (1984) compared attitudes, perceptions and experiences
of 366 transfer and 1,516 non-transfer students, using the
Student Transfer Questionnaire.
Results showed that loss of
credits is perceived as the most important problem in transferring
to students least familiar with the system.
Handel suggested a
need for more information and advising for potential transfer
students.
Roelf (1975) states that when a transfer student enters a
four-year college beyond the freshman year or stops out of college
30
for a period of time, the transfer student usually falls into the
older-than-average category and will have a different set of
needs, responsibilities and motives than younger counterparts.
Lewin (1935) theorized that a person's feelings, actions and perceptions grow out of his/her environment.
Murray (1938) theorized
that an individual has a transactional relationship with his/her
environment.
Spady (1970) theorized that students who did not integrate
easily into the social and academic realms of their institution's
environment would be more likely to drop out.
Spady's study shows
that the transfer student does have a difficult time meeting
social needs at the four-year college.
Programming for Transfer Students
In the past, the connections between the theoretical framework regarding students' successful matriculation and student performance have not been strong.
This has been particularly true
for the two-year and four-year transfer students.
31
Orientation for Transfer Students
An orientation is a comprehensive program to provide
substantial documentation for new transfer students to acquaint
them with programs and services, to support their studies and to
help them succeed in their adjustment to the four-year college
work and life.
According to Beck (1980); Wilkie and Kuckuck (1989); and
Witten (1970), their studies of various orientation programs have
shown that orientations increase participants' self-concept and
values.
According to Copeland (1986) and Dempsey (1986), research
revealed that the University of Puget Sound, Arizona Community
Colleges, LaGuardia Community College, Cuyahoga Community College
and Sacramento Community College are examples of colleges which
have determined student needs and created orientation programs
designed to retain students and increase transfer success at fouryear schools.
Nelson (1966) stated that transfer students often found it
difficult to become involved in student activity programs at the
senior college, even though they had participated successfully at
the two-year college.
He recommended that senior colleges mini-
mize articulation difficulties by providing orientation induction
programs reflecting the interests and problems of the entering
two-year college transfer students and by early assignment of
advisors.
32
Extended Orientation Programs
Kramer and Washburn (1983) examined the perceived orientation needs of college freshmen and transfer students (N-527) and
whether these needs were met or unmet.
Results showed that new
students, both before and after orientation, saw academic and
career planning as the primary objective of an orientation program.
Uperagt and Gardner (1989) state that the positive factor
of the extended orientation course has been a welcoming environment for transfer students at the four-year institution.
Swain and Degus (1988) conducted a two-year study at Monroe
Community College (MCC) in Rochester, New York, to assess the need
for and define the objectives of an expanded orientation program,
to determine the components of such a program and how these components would be integrated with other student development services
and to propose and design a program for future implementation.
Findings of the study resulted in the development of an orientation plan which underscores institutional commitment to the program, outlines goals and objectives, proposes a design for orientation sessions and an orientation course and considers organizational, staffing and funding considerations.
Palmer (1986) conducted a study whose objective was to
smooth the flow of students from two-year colleges to baccalaureate-granting institutions.
Focusing on more than transfer of
course credits, these efforts have involved multi-dimensional
33
programs which identify and assist potential transfer students.
The result was a stronger transfer function, represented by an
attempt to place the two-year college more securely in the educational mainstream of student flow from high school through the
baccalaureate.
According to Angel and Bannena (1991), the Transfer Opportunities Program (TOP) is a central element for the faculty.
The
TOP offers students in General Studies an alternative to viewing
college as "banking" a number of courses and credits and using the
possibility of transfer to four-year colleges as the sole criterion.
TOP sees the real educational task as preparing students to
perform well at their transfer institutions.
It does this by
replacing the independent, three-credit course with a twelvecredit unit of instruction, staffed by a core group of faculty
large enough to offer a vital intellectual community to students.
The pedagogical approach mixes lectures with seminars, small-group
discussions, "writing across the curriculum" and other activities
that draw faculty and students into closer contact.
Students can
only take themselves seriously as learners if they enter into and
experience the academic culture.
According to Grosset (1991):
Improved educational planning would enhance both
This could be
younger and older student persistence.
accomplished, in part, by providing all new students
early in the enrollment process with special orientation programs that make them aware of the array of
program possibilities, course selections, registration
procedures, and available support services.
34
Beyond this general orientation, individual
counseling and advising sessions should focus on
student short- and long-term educational goals and
students with undefined objectives should be provided
with intrusive advisement that translates their nonspecific educational goals into programs of study
where coursework and desired outcomes are clearly
linked.
Strong academic assessment programs, coupled
with placement in courses that are designed to offset
gaps in preparation, are needed to encourage positive
academic experiences. A greater counseling effort
should be focused on ensuring that bridging or entry
experiences are available to students who are not
college-ready.
Rice and Thomas (1989) conducted a study at Oregon State
University on the effect of orientations and extended orientaA quasi-experimental design using four matched groups of
tions.
entering Oregon State University freshmen was constructed to in-
vestigate whether various types of orientation programming and
increasing levels of exposure to orientation programming would
have any effect upon freshman reaction to college, following their
first term on campus.
The study also investigated the effect of
orientation-related programming upon freshman academic performance, as measured by first-term and first-year GPA and retention
rates.
Oregon State University currently has four types of orientation-related programs for freshmen.
1.
These programs include:
a week-long orientation given immediately prior to
registration (Traditional);
2.
a two-day Summer orientation program (SOAP);
35
an extended one-credit-hour orientation course taught
3.
by trained upper-classmen (HIED 101x); and
a one-credit-hour university seminar taught by
4.
volunteer faculty and staff (HIED 102x).
The availability of these programs provided an excellent opportunity to study the general and additive effects of orientation
programming.
The university seminar (HIED 102x) began during the Fall of
Eighty-eight newly-enrolled freshmen elected to participate
1987.
in the course, which was offered one hour each week throughout the
Fall term.
Student participants were enrolled in one of eight
sections of approximately 12 students and were taught by either a
faculty or staff volunteer.
All of the university seminar
students had also participated in the other three orientation
Each of the 88 students enrolling in the seminar was
programs.
matched on four variables--gender, academic major, high school
Grade Point Average and housing status--with three additional
freshmen who each had participated in a different type of orientation program.
A total of 352 freshmen, representing 15.2 per-
cent of the entering freshman class, were selected for investigation.
The groups and their type of orientation included the
following:
Group 1
Traditional Orientation (N-88)
Students who attended only the Fall term preregistration orientation program.
36
Group 2 - Summer Orientation Program-SOAP (N-88)
Students who participated in both the Fall orientation
program and the Summer orientation program (SOAP).
Group 3 - HIED 101x (N =88)
Students who participated in the Fall and Summer
orientation programs and the first-term extended
orientation course taught by upper-classmen (HIED
101x).
Group 4 - HIED 102x (N-88)
Students who participated in the Fall and Summer
orientation programs, the first-term extended orientation course (HIED 101x) and the one-credit-hour
university seminar course (HIED 102x).
At the conclusion of the Fall term, each of the 352 students
was asked to complete the Student Reaction to College Survey
(SRC).
Usable surveys were available for 60 of the 88 matched
groups, representing 68 percent of the students surveyed.
The
percentage of favorable reactions among the four groups were compared on the 19 sub-categories (Table 2) and on each of the 150
items of the SRC.
Academic performance, including Fall term and
first-year GPA, retention rates, probation percentages and
percentage of students with GPA's of 3.5 or better were also
compared among the four groups.
37
The intent of the study was to determine if increased participation in orientation-related programming would affect freshman
reaction to college and freshman-year academic performance.
It
was hypothesized that increased participation would produce more
favorable reaction to college and would have a more positive effect upon student academic performance.
38
TABLE 2
Significant Differences Among Groups on the SRC Sub-categories
SRC Category/Item
Numbers are percent
HIED
tional SOAP
101x
ITradi-
HIED'
102x
Chisquare
Significance
Organized Student Activities
29
31
38
30
1.085
.781
Programming
69
74
65
71
.979
.806
Grading
57
60
49
57
.973
.808
Help with Living Arrangements
32
34
40
32
.944
.815
Registration/Scheduling
66
59
62
62
.889
.828
Quality of Instruction
70
74
75
69
.870
.845
Rules and Regulations
30
30
47
40
.543
.909
Instructor Accessibility
66
61
62
58
.465
.926
Studying
50
54
56
52
.436
.933
Academic Performance
52
56
54
52
.336
.953
Financial and Related
Problems
69
72
75
71
.329
.954
Planning
64
64
64
59
.315
.957
Form of Instruction
55
55
59
54
.304
.959
Involvement with Faculty
50
55
57
57
.301
.960
Library/Bookstore
77
79
85
82
.288
.962
Student-Centered Instruction
46
43
43
42
.169
.982
Counseling and Advising
65
62
61
61
.144
.986
Campus Climate
57
59
60
62
.069
.995
Administrative Procedures
51
50
54
54
.033
.998
39
A General Summary of the SRC Item Differences Among the Groups
Traditional
This group was significantly less involved with faculty and
more unsure about what they were getting from college, felt less
able to get help and found college information difficult to get.
In addition, this group had less clarity about their future goals
and were less satisfied with college services.
They felt more
isolated in areas of obtaining help and support and more frustrated with advisement services.
They expressed greater displeasure
with academic coursework and had a higher number of scheduling and
advisement problems.
Results of this analysis are shown in Table
2 (page 38).
SOAP Group
Students in this group were significantly more satisfied
with some aspects of the quality and forms of instruction.
They
displayed higher levels of dissatisfaction with the rules and regulations and more frustration with the availability of college
information.
They were significantly less involved with faculty,
but they appeared to be more satisfied with coursework.
They were
less socially integrated in expressing less interaction with
40
faculty and little involvement with campus activities.
They ex-
perienced far fewer scheduling and advisement problems and were
more sure about their place in college than traditional group
members.
Results of this analysis are shown in Table 2 (page 38).
HIED 101x Group
The student-led group displayed high levels of satisfaction
with student services, although they were less satisfied with the
registration process and more frustrated in accessing counselors.
They were likely to feel that they were treated as adults and more
likely to participate in campus activities.
They were signifi-
cantly more likely to believe that students have a role in making
the rules and regulations which affect them.
They showed more
confusion about what courses to take and were more likely to drop
courses.
However, they were significantly less likely to get
behind in their coursework.
They felt that information about
college was easy to get and the college was supportive in helping
students with problems.
in-class assignments.
thievery on campus.
(page 38).
They were more supportive of cooperative
However, they did feel more vulnerable to
Results of this analysis are shown in Table 2
41
HIED 102x Group
The group having the full array of orientation-related
programming exhibited significantly high levels of faculty involvement and satisfaction in getting information about the
college.
They expressed a high degree of dissatisfaction with the
quality and form of instruction on some of the SRC items.
They
indicated a high preference for cooperative in-class assignments.
Although they interacted with faculty more than the other groups,
they expressed higher levels of dissatisfaction with the quality
of faculty interaction--especially in having faculty understand
student points of view.
They paralleled the traditional orienta-
tion group in believing that the college was not as responsive to
student problems as it should have been.
Results of this analysis
are shown in Table 2 (page 38).
An Analysis of the Academic Performance of the
Orientation-Related Groups
GPA
A one-way analysis of variance comparing the first-term and
first-year GPA's of the four orientation-related groups is indicated in Table 3.
The groups showed significant differences in both
42
the first-term and the first-year GPA.
A multiple comparison test
showed that the HIED 102x group scored significantly higher CPA's
than either the traditional or the HIED 101x group.
TABLE 3
Grade Point Average for Orientation-Related Groups
Time Period
Traditional
SOAP
HIED 101x
HIED 102x
ANOVA value
First Term
2.49
2.66
2.50
2.81
9.38 *
First Year
2.43
2.69
2.56
2.93
11.03 *
* significant .05
Honors Status
A chi-square analysis of the groups' percentage of students
with CPA's greater than 3.50 shows no significant differences in
first-term nor the first-year percentage of students earning more
than GPA's of 3.50 (Table 4).
TABLE 4
Percentage of Participants With GPA's Greater Than 3.5
Time Period
Traditional
n
SOAP
n
HIED 101x
n
HIED 102x
n
CHI-square
First Term
9%
8
8%
7
11%
10
17%
15
1.24
First Year
8%
7
9%
8
12%
11
18%
16
1.17
43
Probationary Status
A chi-square analysis of students with GPA's of 2.00 or less
shows a significant difference in the first term and in the first
year among the groups (Table 5).
HIED 102x group members were
less likely to earn grades under 2.00 at the conclusion of their
first term and year on campus.
TABLE 5
Percentage of Participants With GPA's Less Than 2.00
Time Period
Traditional
n
SOAP
n
HIED 101x
n
HIED 102x
n
Chi-square
First Term
22%
19
15%
13
21%
18
7%
6
8.32 *
First Year
26%
23
14%
12
22%
19
7%
6
12.19 *
* significant at .05
Retention Rates
A chi-square analysis was conducted to determine if student
retention rates were affected by the degree of orientation-related
exposure (Table 6).
No significant differences were found,
although there was a slight tendency for students having the full
array of programming (HIED 102x) to have higher retention rates
following their first year.
44
TABLE 6
Retention Percentage of Participants
Time Period
Traditional
n
SOAP
n
HIED 101x
n
HIED 102x
n
Chi-square
First Term
93%
82
96%
84
94%
83
96%
84
.009
First Year
85%
75
91%
80
89%
78
96%
84
.695
Summary of Academic Performance Findings
Students experiencing the full array of orientation-related
programming achieved significantly higher first-year GPA's and
significantly lower percentages of participants with GPA's of less
than 2.0.
The additive value of having freshmen participate in a
full array of orientation programming which culminated with a
faculty- or staff-led freshman seminar seemed to make a significant difference in freshman academic performance.
On the other
hand, freshmen having only the pre-registration orientation were
most vulnerable to attrition and low grade point performance.
45
Survey Of Related Literature
The review of related literature focuses on three areas:
changing roles in higher education, current research on transfer
students and programming for transfer students.
Changing Roles in Higher Education
The following related literature will focus on changing
roles in higher education for transfer students.
Bernstein's (1989) studies show a decline in student transfer from two- to four-year colleges.
He discusses the inadequacy
of conventional explanations for the decline in transfer and
points to underlying policies and practices that affect transfer
(e.g., lack of faculty involvement, inadequate funding and ineffective articulation with four-year schools).
According to Bender (1991), legislators and college leaders
bring different concerns to the issue of student transfer policy
effectiveness.
If governing boards do not ensure effective trans-
fer, legislatures may take the initiative by issuing mandates for
interinstitutional cooperation.
The key to successful transfer
and articulation is collegial faculty-to-faculty relationships.
Volkwein (1986) conducted a study on the relationship between transfer student interaction with faculty and intellectual
46
growth.
The quality of the faculty-student relationship, both
inside and outside the classroom, was significantly and positively
related to two measures of self-perceived intellectual growth.
The American Council on Education (1991) focused on the
academic dimensions of student transfer from two- to four-year
institutions.
This report seeks to provide a foundation for in-
stitutional and academic policy decisions affecting the transfer
student experience and transfer student achievement.
The report
presents a policy statement on academic achievement and transfer
and a nine-point agenda for action.
four-year institutions to:
The agenda calls on two- and
1) establish a firm commitment to
transfer; 2) enrich the connection between teaching and transfer;
3) revitalize academic relationships between institutions; 4)
manage transfer more effectively; 5) identify and realize transfer
goals; 6) inform students fully; 7) issue a clear public call for
improved transfer; 8) acknowledge the importance of financial
support; and 9) establish firm expectations of transfer students.
Enhancing Transfer Effectiveness (1990), a study for the
National Effective Transfer Consortium, observed effective
transfer practices in four areas:
1.
Relations with four-year schools were characterized by a climate of cooperation and
the development of complete and detailed
articulation agreements.
2.
Student services that support transfer were
often centrally coordinated, and frequently
included specialized academic support and
47
advising programs for potential
transfer students.
3.
Technical support for the transfer function
included sophisticated student information
systems, articulation databases, and research on transfer issues.
4.
Relations with elementary/secondary
education often involved cooperation and
outreach activities at high schools and
junior high schools, and coordination of
curricula and academic programs between the
community college and its feeder high
schools.
We also found that transfer practices that are
effective for traditional transfer students may not
provide adequate help for large numbers of students
Strategies that
with a low propensity to transfer.
appeared to be effective for non-traditional transfer
students included:
1.
Student outreach that emphasized personal
contact;
2.
Student services that included specialized
programs targeted to serve specific populations such as older re-entering women,
single parents, or academically underprepared students; and
3.
Academic support for students with special
needs.
Most NETC colleges have only begun to develop
the specialized services needed to fully support nontraditional transfer students. The effective development of such services could substantially increase
colleges' overall transfer rates.
Colleges with high transfer effectiveness had a
multitude of activities that supported transfer, in a
complex and interdependent system. The challenge for
the 1990s may well be one of developing transfer
strategies -- within supportive organizational environments -- that can strike a balance between meeting
the needs of traditional and non-traditional transfer
students.
48
In 1987 the Southern Regional Education Board suggested
specific ways that two-year colleges could better serve their
students.
The recommendations were presented in the areas of:
1) student assessment and placement in associate degree programs;
2) the establishment of linkages between two-year colleges and
high schools through a joint coordinating structure; 3) the
effectiveness of programs in the two-year colleges; 4) the
strengthening of collaboration and communication between faculty
from two-year colleges and senior institutions; and 6) the
improvement of cooperation between two- and four-year colleges.
According to Community Colleges Where America Goes to
College (1991),
:
on average, community college students begin postsecondary studies with lower levels of academic
achievement than students at four-year colleges and
universities. Only 9 percent of high school seniors
with an "A" average attend community colleges in the
first year after graduation; in contrast, 44 percent
of these "A" students attend public four-year colleges
and 27 percent attend private four-year colleges.
It must be remembered that these figures reflect
average trends and that community colleges enroll
large numbers of academically-able students. Nonetheless, community colleges provide access for a
disproportionately large share of students whose
academic backgrounds render them unlikely candidates
for admission to four-year colleges and universities.
In admitting these students and providing remediation
and support services where needed, community colleges
undertake one of the most difficult tasks facing
(Page 10.)
higher education today.
49
Table Seven
Percentages of High School Students Attending Community Colleges
and Four-Year Colleges, by High School Grade Point Average
1980 High School Graduates
Students with
Students with
"B" average
"A" average
Students with
"C" average
X attending a public community
college in Fall 1980
9%
17X
13%
X attending a public four-year
college in Fall 1980
44X
31%
6%
X attending a private fouryear college in Fall 1980
27%
11%
3%
Source:
El-Khawas and others, 1988.
(Source: Community Colleges Where America Goes to College
(1991), page 10.)
Farland and Anderson (1989), in a report for California
Community Colleges, Sacramento, Office of the Chancellor, report
on specific activities undertaken in 1987-88 to strengthen articulation and transfer, including: 1) 2 + 2 + 2 projects among high
schools, community colleges and four-year institutions; 2) ongoing
work to develop a general education transfer curriculum; 3) work
to redefine the structure of the associate degree; 4) joint projects with the CSU; 5) activities of the Intersegmental Coordinating Council related to English as a Second Language instruction;
6) the Transfer Center Pilot Project; 7) efforts of the California
Articulation Number Project to develop a statewide cross-refer-
50
enced course numbering system; and 8) Project ASSIST (Articulation
System Stimulating Interinstitutional Student Transfer).
According to Cepeda (1991), the adoption of the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum states the
following:
In 1988, Assembly Bill (AB) 1725 directed the
governing boards of the University of California (UC),
the California State University (CSU), and the California Community Colleges to jointly develop, maintain, disseminate, and adopt a common core curriculum
in general education for the purpose of facilitating
In 1986, all
student transfer between institutions.
three academic senates had already begun work on a
common curriculum in response to recommendations from
California's legislative Review of the Master Plan for
Higher Education. By February 1990, all three senates
had approved the curriculum, with implementation
Completion of this Intersegscheduled for fall 1991.
mental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC)
permits a student to transfer from a community college
to the CSU or UC system without taking additional
general education (GE) courses to satisfy campus GE
requirements. The IGETC calls for a student to
complete specified courses in the following subject
areas: English/Communications, Mathematics, Arts and
Humanities, Social and Behavioral Sciences, and
Foreign Language. The IGETC agreement does not
specify the individual courses to fulfill each of
these requirements, nor does it list the procedures to
be followed by community colleges in certifying that
students have completed the IGETC. This report reviews the relevant AB 1725 legislation, summarizes the
general contents of the IGETC courses, and describes
the plans for its implementation and dissemination.
The full text of the IGETC agreement and the names of
(Page 17.)
the IGETC Committee members are appended.
51
According to Cepeda and Nelson (1991):
California Senate Bill (SB) 121 establishes that a
strong transfer function is the responsibility of all
three segments of higher education; the California
Community Colleges (CCC), the University of California
(UC), and the California State University (CSU), and
that each segment must develop transfer agreement programs, discipline-based articulation agreements,
transfer centers, and a transfer plan for implementation of provisions of the bill.
The Spotlight On The Transfer Function (1990) provided
information on transfer centers at Los Rios Community College:
The goal of the Transfer Center Project is to increase
the overall transfer rate of students, particularly
underrepresented ethnic minorities, by coordinating
resources and services designed to facilitate the
transfer process. This project was initiated in 1985
and is established at sites serving approximately
24,000 students annually. The project involves 20
community colleges, 14 CSU campuses, eight UC
campuses, and two independent universities. A recent
independent evaluation of the project found that the
overall transfer rates to UC and CSU have improved at
the 20 campuses with state-funded transfer centers,
and that the rates for Hispanic and Asian students are
higher at these campuses than at colleges without
transfer centers.
Each Los Rios campus has a well-developed transfer
center with a wealth of supplies furnished by
universities and state monies. The Transfer Opportunity Program was brought into the Transfer Center
Project, and the University of California at Davis
Transfer Center adviser spends two days a week at the
two larger colleges and one day at the smaller one.
Staff from Los Rios and California State University,
Sacramento, also formed an agreement similar to this
The University of the Pacific is our independent
one.
university partner in this program. An intersegmental
committee oversees the Transfer Center Project and is
the policy making group for Los Rios's three centers.
This steering committee meets once a month.
52
Some of the many activities of the Transfer Center are
making sure that transfer students have up-to-date information and providing workshops on admissions,
financial aid, housing, how to fill out the applications, advertising, and making appointments for other
four-year representatives, and providing trips to the
"On-the-spot admissions" aimed specifuniversities.
ically at affirmative action students generates large
The "Spring in Davis" and
numbers of transfers.
Crossover Enrollment at California State University,
Sacramento allows those students who apply to the
University of California at Davis and/or California
State University, Sacramento, to take one or two
courses at the university during their last term before they transfer. All fees are waived for the
students; the only cost to them is for books. This
activity gives the students an opportunity to experience what it's really like to take a course at the
California State University, Fresno,
university.
later joined this activity. (Page 55.)
The Missouri Coordinating Board for Higher Education (1987)
is required by statute to "establish guidelines to promote and
facilitate the transfer of students between institutions of higher
education within the state;" thus allowing students to complete a
degree program in the shortest time possible, whether remaining in
one institution or transferring to another.
These transfer guide-
lines are applicable to course credits and related matters for
undergraduate students who want to transfer between Missouri
public colleges and universities.
They are also recommended for
Missouri independent institutions.
Transfer policy information
includes: baccalaureate degree program; general education; associate degrees (associate of arts degree, associate of science
degree, associate of applied science degree, other associate
53
degrees); transfer without a degree; admission of transfer students (institutional admission, program admission); catalog;
change in major; transfer of credit; transfer of grades; credit by
examination, experimental learning, and pass/fail credit; and
state certification or statutory requirements.
Kominski's (1990) report informed that one of the several
purposes of Oregon community colleges is to prepare students for
successful transfer into four-year colleges.
The report showed
that academic year 1988 transfer students' Grade Point Averages
(CPA's) declined slightly the first year after community college
transfer.
This was true of all Oregon State University colleges
with the exception of Education, Health and Human Performance and
Home Economics.
The three colleges enrolled too small a number of
students to detect statistically significant differences.
Table 7 for specifics on academic year 1988.
See
54
TABLE 7
1988 Admissions From Community Colleges
to Oregon State University
Status at End of First Year
Transfer
Hours
Successfully
Completed
Hours
OSU
GPA
Community
College
GPA
N
99
51
2.86
2.93
14
Business
107
45
2.98
3.09
61
Education
103
57
3.23
2.98
8
Engineering (Pre)
102
40
2.95
3.17
20
Engineering
113
52
3.17
3.30
19
Forestry
108
43
2.88
2.97
11
98
54
2.91
2.86
6
Home Economics
114
44
3.11
3.04
7
Liberal Arts
103
49
3.01
3.05
57
Pharmacy
117
45
2.80
2.93
10
Science
107
43
2.99
3.00
38
Total
106
47
2.99
3.06
251
College
Agriculture
Hlth & Human Perf
55
Current Research on Transfer Students
A review of related literature showed that investigations
have been conducted on transfer students.
The following related
literature will focus on current research on transfer students.
Holahan (1983) analyzed longitudinal data covering six years
for transfer student (N-3,407) performance and degree completion.
Results showed that: 1) transfer students completed degrees as
often as non-transfers; 2) community college transfers performed
less well than other groups; and 3) sex and ethnicity related to
performance and retention.
Wright (1990) conducted a study to investigate the differential predictability of academic success between those who transferred to a private multi-purpose university from two-year
colleges and those who transferred from four-year institutions.
The study looked at success after one academic year, using
Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores and Grade Point Averages
(GPA's) at the time of transfer as predictors.
Data were col-
lected from 697 students who transferred to the university during
the academic years 1984 through 1989.
The students transferred
from six four-year colleges, nine community colleges and one
private two-year college.
Findings included the following:
1) overall GPA at the time of transfer was 2.78 for two-year
college transfers and 2.42 for four-year college transfers;
2) GPA after two semesters was 2.31 for two-year college transfers
56
and 2.62 for four-year college transfers; 3) SAT verbal scores
averaged 409.7 for two-year college transfers and 449.9 for fouryear college transfers; and 4) SAT math scores averaged 453.0 for
two-year college transfers and 490.9 for four-year college transfers.
Cross validation was conducted by using 1988-89 data on 88
students.
The study suggested that GPA at the time of transfer
was the best predictor of academic success for transfer students
from two-year colleges, and that both SAT scores and GPA's were
necessary variables for predicting the academic success of
transfer students from four-year institutions.
Kintzer and Wattenbarger (1985), in The Articulation/
Transfer Phenomenon: Patterns and Directions, stated that:
The most recent material released by the University of
California on first-year performance of community
college transfers suggests that "most transfers are
adequately prepared for the University and achieve an
acceptable level of performance on University of
California campuses." The average difference between
GPA transferred to the University by community college
graduates and initial GPA earned during the first university upper-division year was one-half of a grade
point -- the normal "transfer shock" drop.
The firstyear upper-division GPA of "natives" (2.96) and
"transfers" (2.92 for transfers who were eligible for
UC enrollment upon high school graduation and 2.67 for
those who were not eligible upon high school graduation) compared favorably.
(Page 11.)
According to the Riverside Community College District,
California Office of Research and Planning (1991) study, students
who transfer to a four-year institution (California State University, or CSU) from Riverside Community College (RCC) had an in-
57
crease in Grade Point Average (GPA).
Some of the findings were:
1) while RCC experienced a 17% drop in the number of students
transferring to CSU between 1975 and 1989, all California Community Colleges (CCC's) had a 21% decline during the same period;
2) between fall 1986 and fall 1987, RCC had a 19% increase in the
number of CSU transfers, while the CCC system as the whole experienced a 2% increase; 3) about 80% of all RCC and CCC transfers to
CSU were admitted to the upper division; 4) in fall 1986, RCC
upper-division transfers to CSU had a 2.79 GPA at RCC, which rose
to 2.84 after transferring to CSU; and 5) for the last four years,
RCC upper-division transfers have had higher GPA's upon transferring to CSU than either all CCC transfers or CSU natives.
Owen (1991) examined whether or not there are significant
differences in the academic performance and graduation rates of
undergraduate transfer students compared to students who entered
the general campuses as first-time freshmen in selected two- and
four-year campuses in the state of Colorado.
There were four
student cohorts studied within three campuses (Boulder, Denver,
Colorado Springs) of the University of Colorado system, and a
comparison of their performance was made involving Grade Point
Average (GPA), mean term credit load, graduation rates and
retention/drop-out rates.
Findings revealed that there are
significant differences between the academic performance and
graduation rates of in-state, first-time freshmen and transfer
students.
In comparison to the freshman students who survived to
58
their second year, the transfer cohorts: 1) had a lower percentage
attaining a 2.0 GPA or better in their first year; 2) took a lower
student credit hour load; and 3) brought between 31 and 39
transfer student credit hours, while the surviving freshman
cohorts brought a median of 30 credit hours to their second year
on the Boulder campus and 27 credit hours at the Colorado Springs
and Denver campuses.
Pounds and Anderson's (1989) summary statistics for students
transferring to and from institutions of the university system of
Georgia during 1987-88 fiscal year (summer quarter 1987 through
spring quarter 1988) were compiled for this report.
Key findings
include the following: 1) of the 16,954 students who transferred
into system institutions, 7,921 (46.7%) came from institutions
outside the system, and of these, 2,048 were from in-state nonsystem institutions and 5,873 transferred from out-of-state
schools; 2) 9,033 students transferred between system institutions; 3) the largest flow was from senior colleges to other
senior colleges, with the 3,766 students in this category
representing 41.7% of within-system transfers; 4) the second
largest flow was from two-year colleges to senior colleges,
including 3,608 students who comprised 39.9% of within-system
transfers; 5) the transfers from two-year colleges to two-year
colleges (N-398) and from senior colleges to two-year colleges
(N-1,261) were relatively small in number; and 6) students
transferring from two-year colleges to senior colleges had a very
59
slight overall decrease of .08 in GPA after transferring, while
the other three categories of within-system transfer students
achieved an overall higher GPA after transferring.
A report developed by James Madison University (JMU) (1989)
in Virginia, presented results of a study of the academic performance of JMU transfers from Virginia's public two-year colleges.
Following an introductory section, the report describes the
methods used to determine the information needs of the two-year
colleges and to protect the students' right to privacy.
Next,
results of the transfer student study are presented, indicating
that: 1) unsolicited responses from two community colleges
attested to the usefulness of the data collected; 2) 393 two-year
college students transferred to JMU between 1985 and 1989; 3) four
Virginia community colleges accounted for 72% of all of JMU's
transfer students; 4) an average of 42.7 transfer credits were
accepted per student, and more than half of the students
transferred more than 40 credits; 5) 88.4% of the transfers were
either on the president's list, dean's list, or in good standing;
6) the combined GPA of the transfers was 2.73, compared to 2.79
for all JMU students enrolled during fall 1988; and 7) transfers
performed well in most disciplines except biology, chemistry,
mathematics, physics, accounting and economics, where the overall
GPA was below 2.2.
60
Programming for Transfer Students
The following related literature will focus on programming
for transfer students.
Also included in the related literature on
freshman programming are models which would be effective for
transfer student programming.
Roberts and Warren (1984) describe the participation of
South Mountain Community College (SMCC), in Phoenix, Arizona, in
the Ford Foundation's Urban Community Colleges Transfer Opportunities Program and the activities developed at the college to guide
students from the beginning of their college careers at SMCC
through their transfer and retention at a four-year college or
university.
After providing background on the college and its
clientele, the project overview outlines the three components of
the program:
1) the College Orientation Program, a week-long
program for entering transfer-oriented students which introduces
key administrators and facilities and provides instruction in
note-taking and test-taking; 2) the Mentor Program, which seeks to
provide selected students with intensive and personalized support
from faculty members during an entire semester; and 3) the University Orientation Program, a university course taught at SMCC which
covers topics including student motivation and goal setting,
language facility, study and test-taking skills and university
resources and procedures.
The next sections describe achievements
to date in the three programs, highlighting the responsibilities
61
of project staff, recruitment procedures, the range of activities
undertaken by faculty mentors and completion rates.
After dis-
cussing the extent to which project objectives have been achieved,
the report discusses ways in which each of the program components
have been modified and institutionalized at SMCC.
Rendon (1986) conducted a study of the major transfer education issues and proposed a comprehensive strategy for studying
and improving transfer education:
1) access to higher education
for minorities and low socioeconomic status (SES) whites continues
to be a problem; 2) over 50% of all entering community college
students have goals related to attaining a baccalaureate;
3) students who complete two years in a community college may be
expected to perform reasonably well at a senior institution; 4) no
one educational sector can solve the transfer problem alone;
5) occupational students, especially those in allied health, engineering technology, data processing, agriculture and forestry programs, transfer in sizeable numbers; 6) faculty/student contact is
one of the most important determinants of student retention;
7) giving students the right to fail simply has not worked;
8) literacy demands placed on community college students have
decreased; 9) concerted efforts to address transfer education involving collaboration between two- and four-year colleges have
achieved promising results; and 10) when community colleges fail
to collect information and data, they lose out on a valuable
62
opportunity to make modifications to improve their curricular and
student support services.
In April 1990 the American Association of Community and
Junior Colleges and the National Center for Academic Achievement
and Transfer conducted a national survey of 1,366 regionally
accredited, degree-granting, two-year public and private colleges
to identify practices used to foster and encourage student transfers to senior institutions.
The institutions were asked to de-
scribe the frequency with which they employed the various transfer
strategies, their method of identifying transfer students and
their method of calculating institutional transfer statistics.
Study findings, based on a 39.4% response rate, included the
following: 1) the institutions utilized written articulation
agreements (85%), course equivalency guides (81%) and transfer
counselors (81%); 2) additional transfer strategies employed included joint degree programs, dual registration, transfer information centers, intercollegiate relations commissions and guaranteed
admissions to receiving institutions; 3) the most popular methods
used to identify students who transferred were graduate follow-up
surveys, estimates/guesses, state reporting systems, documentation
of transcript requests and information obtained from senior institutions; and 4) most institutions based transfer statistics on
recent associate degree graduates or students enrolled in transfer
63
curricula, producing higher transfer rates than institutions considering the entire student population in estimating transfer
rates.
The Journal of The Freshman Year Experience (1990) stated
that orientation programs, pre-entry and extended, should direct
their energies not only to giving students the information they
need to manage college, but also the important task of community
building.
Educational institutions should center their attention
on helping students make the often difficult transition to the
senior educational institution and establish competent membership
in the social and intellectual communities of the educational
institution.
For that reason, orientation programs and first-year
programs generally should contain, where possible, some form of
faculty and/or peer mentoring.
For all students, but for minority
students in particular, these individual bonds prove to be an important element in the social support system needed for learning.
Barringer (1990) offered a strategic approach to incorporate
a college seminar into the freshman curriculum.
Barringer (1990)
has listed five general goals for students to be achieved via the
college seminar course:
1) acquire a sense of the college com-
munity and its structure; 2) begin to identify skill deficiencies
and work on improvement; 3) identify potential personal growth,
goal commitment and career decisions; 4) learn to solve problems;
and 5) improve academic performance and college life.
The college
seminar course should be a two-credit course, mandatory for all
64
undeclared freshmen and strongly recommended for all declared
freshmen.
The class would meet once a week during the first term.
Okon (1986) studied a project at Kalamazoo College to promote student transfers from two-year colleges.
Among the accom-
plishments of the project were the preparation of a general transfer student brochure addressing issues of admissions, financial
aid, credit transfer and academic advising; the distribution of a
quick reference sheet stating transfer and credit policies to all
admissions counselors at Kalamazoo Valley Community College; the
development of a special application for transfer admission; the
institution of a new policy whereby transfer applicants receive
information on degree requirements and a written evaluation of
their transcripts; and the establishment of closer contacts between Kalamazoo College's Transfer Coordinator and local community
colleges.
Other projects, in progress at the time of Okon's
study, include research on the educational backgrounds of transfer
students and the development of a special transfer student orientation program.
A study was conducted at Monroe Community College (MCC)
(1989) in Rochester, New York, to assess the need for and define
the objectives of an expanded orientation program, to determine
the components of such a program and how these components would be
integrated with other student development services, and to propose
and design a program for future implementation.
Data for the
study were collected through 40 interviews with faculty, staff,
65
and administrators from 27 departments; an off-campus orientation
workshop involving 26 student affairs professionals; a survey of
1,025 MCC students; a pilot orientation program presented to 324
high school seniors; an evening orientation program for "2 + 2"
transfer students and their parents; a review of the literature on
orientation; and an analysis of programs at other institutions.
The study found support for expansion of the college's orientation
program among faculty and staff, a lack of awareness among many
current students of existing orientation options, and support for
the existing peer counseling program.
Based on study findings, an
orientation plan was developed which underscores institutional
commitment to the program, outlines goals and objectives, proposes
a design for orientation sessions and an orientation course, and
considers organizational, staffing, and funding considerations.
66
CHAPTER III
RESEARCH DESIGN
The following is a description of this study's experimental
and comparison groups, experimental treatment, procedure, design,
methods of analysis and hypotheses.
The purpose of this study was to measure the effect of an
extended orientation course on two-year and four-year transfer
students to determine if such a course can positively enhance
transfer student academic achievement at Oregon State University,
and to collect descriptive data on the institution's transfer
student population.
1.
Did participation in the course affect transfer
student academic integration as measured by the three
indicators of academic achievement (GPA, retention and
graduation rate)?
a.
Did transfer students traditionally show de-
clines in GPA during their first term after
entering Oregon State University?
b.
Following this drop, did the transfer students'
GPA's gradually increase?
c.
What were the effects of transfer orientation
classes upon transfer student GPA?
67
d.
What were the effects of transfer orientation
classes upon transfer student retention?
e.
What were the effects of transfer orientation
classes upon transfer student graduation rates?
The Population
Two groups were selected for observation.
One group
consisted of transfer students who enrolled in a transfer orientation course and the other group consisted of transfer students who
did not enroll in a transfer orientation course.
The two groups of students were all newly-enrolled transfer
students at Oregon State University.
Both groups had similar majors, entering GPA's and places of
residence.
Experimental Group
The experimental group consisted of 80 entering transfer
students who voluntarily enrolled in a course in Fall 1988 titled
HIED 202 (Transfer Orientation Course) and completed the twocredit course.
The students were recruited into the newly-offered course by
circulating information about the program to:
68
1.
Oregon community college counselors;
2.
Head advisors of colleges and schools at Oregon State
University;
3.
The New Student Office at Oregon State University; and
4.
Students, themselves, in flyers distributed throughout
the Oregon State University campus.
The experimental group was 45 percent female and 55 percent
male; the average age was 22.5 years.
The students represented
majors within most of the undergraduate colleges at Oregon State
University.
(A detailed description of the experimental popula-
tion is found in Chapter IV.)
Comparison Group
The comparison group (N-80) was drawn from newly admitted
transfer students not enrolled in the transfer student extended
orientation course.
These students were randomly selected within
the following defined parameters:
1.
Transfer students with sufficient credits to be
ineligible for the freshman orientation course (more
than 30 credits) and
2.
Students not above senior status (fewer than 145
credits).
69
The selection was at random from a total group of 1,152
transfer students newly-admitted to Oregon State University during
Fall 1988 and, then, a random numbering sequence was used to draw
a sample from this group.
An attempt was made to select, at
random from the 1,152 transfer students, 80 students who compared
to the experimental group; such as:
1.
Gender
2.
Age
3.
Residential setting (on-campus or off-campus)
4.
Major (college)
5.
Ethnic group
6.
Area (transferring) in-state or out-of-state
7.
Entering GPA and
8.
Class standing
The comparison group was 42.5 percent female and 57.5 percent male; the average age was 22.4 years.
The students repre-
sented majors within most of the undergraduate colleges at Oregon
State University.
(A detailed description of the comparison popu-
lation is found in Chapter IV.)
70
Experimental Treatment
The experimental group attended the course twice per week in
a two-credit elective course held throughout the 1988 Fall term.
The course was based on the freshman extended orientation format
developed at the University of South Carolina and described by
Gardner (1986) and Gordon and Grites (1984).
The students were instructed in techniques intended to:
1.
establish interaction with faculty,
2.
strengthen their self-concepts,
3.
build their study skills, as well as
4.
provide information on the availability and uses of
campus support services.
During Fall term 1988, an experimental course, called HIED
202, was developed to help newly-enrolled transfer students with
their academic and social adjustment to Oregon State University.
The HIED 202 course is similar to the 102x course because of the
similar needs of both groups (see page 35 for information on
102x).
Analyses were conducted in order to determine the effects
of the course upon student reactions to college, student study
habits and attitudes and the degree to which the course fulfilled
its primary objectives.
Course participants were also asked to
share their general opinion as to the value of the course.
71
Rationale For HIED 202
National studies on transfer students clearly point to a
number of adjustment problems encountered by this group of
students.
Transfers traditionally show declines in Grade Point
Average during their first term on a new campus.
Compared to
native students, transfers show higher attrition rates, are more
likely to be less informed about campus policies and are less
likely to utilize the services and resources of their new campus.
Studies also show that transfers rarely participate in traditional
transfer orientation programming.
According to Oregon State
University's Institutional Research and Planning, Office of
Budgets and Planning (1987), a study of transfer students at OSU,
conducted in 1987, indicated that transfer students who saw their
academic advisors more frequently gave more favorable ratings to
the transfer process.
The results of the transfer student studies
underscore the importance of providing structured experiences to
help transfer students bridge their inter-collegiate experiences
in a manner that would make them better higher education
consumers.
72
Objectives of HIED 202
The objectives of the HIED 202 course were formulated upon
the basic principles of retention research.
The clear intent in
the creation of the course was to provide a tool that would help
turn newly-enrolled transfer students into continuing students.
Thus, the basic principles in the construction and content of the
course were patterned after retention theory.
Essentially, the
course attempted to help students clarify their goals, foster
greater institutional commitment, increase student interaction
with peers and faculty, provide methods for increasing student
self-appraisal, furnish students with some very clear academic
skills and knowledge and encourage greater participation in and
involvement with campus life.
Specifically, the HIED 202 course
had ten general objectives:
Objective 1:
To help transfer students develop better
academic survival skills so that they may become more
effective and efficient learners.
Objective 2:
To promote transfer students' formal and
informal involvement with faculty.
Objective 3:
To facilitate the transfer students' awareness
of, involvement in and appreciation for university
resources and services.
73
Objective 4:
To help transfer students understand insti-
tutional policies so that they may feel less encumbered by the rules and regulations of the
university.
Objective 5:
To enhance transfer students' appreciation for
and involvement with the cultural and co-curricular
life of the campus.
Objective 6:
To provide transfer students with a supportive
atmosphere which would foster greater feelings of
community, friendliness and a positive sense of campus
climate.
Objective 7:
To help transfer students develop more posi-
tive attitudes and reactions toward the learning
process.
Objective 8:
To give transfer students advisement-related
support so that they may become more self-directing in
affirming their future academic and career goals.
Objective 9:
To strengthen transfer students' commitment to
the university.
Objective 10:
To increase transfer students' academic
performance in terms of GPA and retention rate.
The course was organized into class sections of 7 to 15
students each.
These sections met for one hour and twenty
minutes, twice a week, for a total of 20 hours during the term.
74
The section instructors were five graduate students and two
faculty members trained in student success enhancement techniques.
The instructors would meet regularly to share information and review successful strategies.
Some of the techniques used in the
seminar included the following:
1.
self-exploration exercises,
2.
study skill assessments,
3.
student journal entries,
4.
campus tours,
5.
guest speakers from student services, and
6.
group projects.
Procedure
1.
Grade Point Averages.
These Averages were collected at the
following intervals in order to study variations as time
progressed:
a.
At the time observation began.
For both groups of
students, observation began at the time of admission
to Oregon State University.
b.
At the end of the first, second and third quarters of
academic years 1988-1989, 1989-1990 and 1990-1991.
c.
After one, two and three years of observation.
d.
Upon receipt of the baccalaureate degree.
75
e.
After all collegiate work.
For students who were
graduated, this included work culminating in a degree;
for students who dropped out, this included work up to
the time of withdrawal or dismissal.
Comparisons of the transfer students enrolled in HIED 202
and the transfer students not enrolled in HIED 202 as a whole
group and as sub-groups.
The following is a comparison made of both groups:
1.
Gender
2.
Age
3.
Residential setting (on-campus or off-campus)
4.
Major (college)
5.
Ethnic group
6.
Area (transferring) in-state or out-of-state
7.
Entering GPA and
8.
Class standing
Design
The design for the comparison of the Grade Point Average
(GPA) for the experimental and comparison groups is as follows:
1.
Observation began:
Fall 1988.
End of first quarter:
Fall 1988, 1989, 1990.
76
Winter 1989, 1990, 1991.
End of second quarter:
End of third quarter:
2.
Spring 1989, 1990, 1991.
After one academic year.
After two academic years.
After three academic years.
3.
Upon receipt of baccalaureate degree.
4.
After all collegiate work completed.
Design Matrix
Before-After Static Group Comparison
Group
Before
Observation Treatment
Experimental
W1
Comparison
W2
X
After
Observation
Y1
Y2
The pre-experimental design needed for the development of
invalidating factors is the static-group comparison.
This is a
design in which the experimental group which experienced treatment
(X) is compared with the comparison group which did not experience
treatment (X), for the purpose of establishing the effect of the
treatment (X).
77
Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley
Sources of Invalidity for
the Static-Group Design
Internal
History
Static-Group
Comparison
X
+
Maturation
?
Testing
RegresInstrumentation sion
+
+
Selection
Mortality
Interaction
of Selection and
Maturation, etc.
+
Y1
Y2
External
Interaction
of Testing
and X
Interaction of
Selection and
Reactive
Arrangements
X
Multiple
Interference
Static-Group
Comparison
X
-
Y,
Y2
NOTE:
In the tables, a minus indicates a definite
weakness, a plus indicates that the factor is
controlled, a question mark indicates a possible
source of concern, and a blank indicates that the
factor is not relevant.
According to Campbell and Stanley (1966), relevant to internal validity, eight different classes of extraneous variables
will be presented; if these variables are not controlled in the
78
experimental design, effects confounded with the effect of the experimental stimulus could be produced.
They represent the effects
of:
1.
History, the specific events occurring between the
first and second measurement in addition to the experimental variable.
2.
Maturation, processes within the respondents operating
as a function of the passage of time per se (not specific to the particular events), including growing
older, growing hungrier, growing more tired, and the
like.
3.
Testing, the effects of taking a test upon the scores
of a second testing.
4.
Instrumentation, in which changes in the calibration
of a measuring instrument or changes in the observers
or scorers used may produce changes in the obtained
measurements.
5.
Statistical regression, operating where groups have
been selected on the basis of their extreme scores.
6.
Biases resulting in differential selection of respondents for the comparison groups.
7.
Experimental mortality, or differential loss of respondents from the comparison groups.
79
8.
Selection-maturation interaction, etc., which in
certain of the multiple-group quasi-experimental
designs might be mistaken for the effect of the
experimental variable.
According to Campbell and Stanley (1966) the factors
jeopardizing external validity or representativeness which will be
discussed are:
1.
The reactive or interaction effect of testing, in
which a pretest might increase or decrease the respondent's sensitivity or responsiveness to the experimental variable and thus make the results obtained
for a pretested population unrepresentative of the effects of the experimental variable for the unpretested
universe from which the experimental respondents were
selected.
2.
The interaction effects of selection biases and the
experimental variable.
3.
Reactive effects of experimental arrangements, which
would preclude generalization about the effect of the
experimental variable upon persons being exposed to it
in non-experimental settings.
80
4.
Multiple-treatment interference, likely to occur whenever multiple treatments are applied to the same re-
spondents, because the effects of prior treatments are
not usually erasable.
The following is how the internal validity is related to
this study:
1.
History.
Specific external events occurring between
the first and second measurements and beyond the control of the researcher, such as a catastrophic event
in the community, that may significantly effect the
performance of the students.
In this study, there
were no abnormal abstractions.
2.
Maturation.
A student can change in many ways over a
period of time, and these changes may be confused with
the effect of the independent variables under consideration.
During the course of the study, the students
(both groups) became wiser, older and so on, which can
cause changes in students.
3.
Testing.
Testing (written test) was not needed by the
two groups for this study.
4.
Instrumentation.
An instrument was not needed because
there was no test given to the two groups.
There were
changes in the obtained measurements because the instructors presented the information differently.
81
5.
Statistical regression.
Statistical regression is
also known as regression to the mean.
The statistical
regression was not used in this study because no pretest and post-test were given.
Both groups entered
Oregon State University by meeting the entry requirements.
6.
Selection bias.
Selection bias existed when, upon
invitation, volunteers were used as members of the
experimental group.
The comparison group members were
picked at random, from a selected group, using a
system of match and random selection.
The entering
GPA for the comparison group was higher than that of
the experimental group.
7.
Experimental mortality.
Mortality, or loss of sub-
jects, is particularly likely in a long-term study.
The study lasted for three academic years, during
which time students in both groups dropped out, went
on academic probation and graduated.
The major con-
cern here is whether the groups experienced different
loss rates that might confound the results.
8.
Selection-maturation interaction, etc.
effect on this study.
This had no
82
The following shows how the external validity related to
this study:
The interaction effects of selection biases and the
experimental variable.
fication.
The extent of treatment veri-
Treatment was administered as intended, ac-
cording to the content of the course (HIED 202).
Methods of Analysis
The present study was designed to examine the academic
achievement of transfer students who were enrolled in the extended
orientation course at Oregon State University, and to ascertain
what difference existed between them and transfer students who did
not enroll in the extended orientation course.
The Registrar's records were used to determine age and
gender.
To ascertain whether the pre-entry attributes of the ex-
perimental and comparison groups were as similar as possible, ttests were used to determine if differences existed between the
two groups.
When small samples are involved, the students' distribution
(t) is used.
There were no significant differences found between the two
groups before the experimental treatment.
83
The next step was to use analysis of variance (ANOVA) to
determine if there were any differences between the experimental
and comparison groups after the treatment of Fall 1988.
According to Devore and Peck (1986), analysis of variance
(ANOVA) involves a comparison of (k) population or treatment
The objective is to test Ho (null hypothesis) against Ha
means.
(alternative hypothesis):
at least two of the means are dif-
ferent.
According to Devore and Peck (1986):
The null hypothesis, denoted by Ho, is the claim that
The other hypothesis
is initially assumed to be true.
is referred to as the alternative hypothesis and is
In carrying out a test of Ho versus
denoted by Ha.
Ha, Ho will be rejected in favor of Ha only if sample
If the
evidence strongly suggests that Ho is false.
sample does not contain such evidence, Ho will not be
The two possible conclusions are then to
rejected.
reject Ho and fail to reject Ho.
According to Devore and Peck (1986) the error of rejecting
Ho when Ho is true is called a type I error.
The error in which
Ho is not rejected when it is false and Ha is true is called a
type II error.
The analysis of variance may be summarized as a
technique for partitioning the variation in the
observed data into parts, each part assignable to
different causes or combinations of causes (Wiersma,
1969, p. 86).
84
Hypotheses
The validity of the HIED 202 course content, as it applies
to the model, was tested by the following hypotheses:
1.
Null Hypothesis
The extended orientation course will have no
significant effect upon transfer students traditionally
showing declines in Grade Point Average (GPA) during their
first term after entering Oregon State University.
Studies reviewed, on the academic performance of
transfer students at four-year institutions, show declines
in Grade Point Averages (GPA's) after their first term on a
new campus.
One of the objectives of the extended orienta-
tion course (HIED 202) is to increase transfer students'
academic performance in terms of GPA.
2.
Null Hypothesis
The extended orientation course will have no
significant effect upon transfer students' Grade Point
Averages (GPA's).
The extended orientation course has been designed to
give transfer students advisement-related support so that
they may become more self-directing in affirming their
academic future.
What has not been attempted is a
comparison of how the effects of academic treatment differs
85
from the effects of advisement-related support received by
newly-admitted students who are not in this type of program.
3.
Null Hypothesis
Participation in the extended orientation course will
have no effect upon transfer retention.
The theories on student withdrawal from institutions
by Spady (1970) and Tinto (1975) led to research studies
which attempted to predict factors that are associated with
retention.
Pascarella and Terenzini (1979A & B) focused on
the model component of academic commitment that related to
students' interaction with faculty.
Their conclusion was
that voluntary withdrawal is a reflection of what occurs on
campus after entry, and another part of this occurrence is
the quality of the formal and informal contact that students
have with faculty.
One of the objectives of the extended
orientation course was to promote transfer students' formal
and informal involvement with faculty.
4.
Null Hypothesis
The extended orientation course will have no effect
upon transfer student graduation rates.
This study followed the transfer students who participated in the extended orientation course until graduation.
The study will compare transfer students who did not take
the course with transfer students who did enroll in the
course.
86
CHAPTER IV
STUDY RESULTS
The purpose of this study was to measure the effect of an
extended orientation course on two-year and four-year transfer
students to determine if such a course could positively enhance
transfer student academic achievement at Oregon State University,
and to collect descriptive data on the institution's transfer
student population.
The data collection for the study was done prior to and
after the completion of the Fall 1988 term, which is the term
during which the extended transfer student orientation course was
offered.
The participants in the course (experimental group) were
compared with those transfer students who were not enrolled in the
course (comparison group) to determine its effects on their Grade
Point Averages (CPA's).
Transfer Student Descriptive Information
An objective of the study was to determine the effect of an
extended orientation course on variables associated with transfer
students' academic achievement.
The study investigated whether
participation in the course affected transfer students' academic
87
achievement as measured by GPA, retention and graduation rates.
The initial comparison group included 1,152 newly enrolled
transfer students.
Eighty students, picked at random, were used
The experimental group was self-selected and
for the study.
totaled 80 students.
The tables of descriptive information which
follow represent the experimental group (extended orientation
course participants) and the comparison group.
Sample Size
The number of participants in the studied groups and in the
entire institutional transfer student population are listed in
Table 8.
The percentages of experimental and comparison transfer
populations involved in the study are also listed.
TABLE 8
Sample Size
Group
Number
% of Newly Enrolled
Transfer Students
Experimental
80
6.94
Comparison
80
6.94
1,152
100.00
OSU Transfers
Summary:
A proportion of the newly admitted transfer student
population, 13.88 percent, was included in the study.
88
Gender
The student records were used to tabulate the percentages of
the males and females in the student groups listed in Table 9.
TABLE 9
Gender
Female
%
Male
Experimental
36
45.0
44
55.0
Comparison
34
42.5
46
57.5
OSU Transfers
N/A
Group
Summary:
%
N/A
There were similar percentages of males and females in
the experimental and comparison groups.
Mean Age
The mean and median ages of experimental and comparison
group members were calculated and compared to each other.
figures are shown in Table 10.
These
89
TABLE 10
Mean Age
Group
Mean
Number
Median
Experimental
80
22.5
20
Comparison
80
22.4
21
OSU Transfers
Summary:
N/A
1,152
N/A
The experimental and comparison means, medians and modes
are similar. The mean age of both groups is within the
18 to 22 years age range, which is the range for traditional college-aged students.
Ages
The separating of the ages into categories was used to
determine the similarities and differences between the ages of the
transfer students and what is considered to be the traditional
college-age range of 18 to 22 years.
in Table 11.
This information is detailed
90
TABLE 11
Ages
Ages
30+
Groups
18
19
20
21
22
23
Experimental
--
14
24
13
9
3
7
10
11
18
21
6
5
12
7
Comparison
Experimental
Comparison
Summary:
--
17.5%
30.0X
16.25X
11.25X
3.75X
13.75X
22.5X
26.25%
7.5%
6.25%
24-30
8.75X
15,0X
12.5X
8.75X
The age categories show that 75 percent of the experimental group and 70 percent of the comparison group were
within the range of 18- to 22-year-old college students,
although the experimental group tended to be concentrated at 19 to 20 years of age and the comparison group
Students over 22, often
at 20 to 21 years of age.
called older-than-average, made up 25 percent of the
experimental group and 30 percent of the comparison
group.
Ages of Females and Males
The ages of the female group participants, shown in
Table 12, were examined to determine if there were any similarities and differences in the overall distribution between the two
groups, as well as between males and females.
The ages of males
in the study were depicted separately to ascertain whether there
were any noticeable trends that differed from those of the female
population.
The results of this analysis are shown in Table 13.
91
TABLE 12
Ages of Females
Ages
Groups
18
Experimental
Comparison
-
Experimental
-
Comparison
Summary:
19
20
21
22
9
11
5
3
5
12
5
3
11.25%
13.75%
6.25%
3.75%
6.25%
15.00%
6.25%
3.75%
23
1
1.25%
24-30
30+
4
5
3
3
5.00%
6.25%
3.75%
3.75%
The most frequent age for the experimental group and the
comparison groups was 20 years. The experimental
group had a larger number of 19-year-old females than
the comparison group. For the ages of 21 and 22 years,
the experimental group and the comparison group had the
same number of females.
Only 11.25 percent of the
experimental group and 8.75 percent of the comparison
group females were over 22 years of age.
TABLE 13
Ages of Males
Ages
Groups
18
19
20
21
Experimental
-
5
13
6
6
Comparison
30+
22
23
8
6
3
3
5
16
3
4
9
4
24-30
Experimental
6.25%
16.25%
10.00%
7.50%
3.75%
3.75%
6.25%
Comparison
7.50%
7.50%
20.00%
3.75%
5.00%
11.25%
5.00%
Summary:
Most of the males and females in both groups tended to
be of traditional college age. Substantially many
more males than females were over the age of 22 years in
both the experimental and comparison groups.
92
Area of Origin
The area of origin is where the members of the experimental
and comparison groups resided before entering Oregon State University, and is detailed in Table 14.
TABLE 14
Area of Origin
Area of Origin
Groups
State of Oregon
Out-of-State
Experimental
57
23
Comparison
70
10
Experimental
71.25%
28.75%
Comparison
87.50%
12.50%
Summary:
The experimental group and the comparison group showed a
large number of transfers within the State of Oregon
System of Higher Education.
93
Former College Enrollment
Former college enrollment is the type of college the
transfer students had attended prior to coming to Oregon State
University.
Table 15 shows the type of college of both groups as
determined by Oregon State University admission records.
TABLE 15
Former College Enrollment
Groups
Number
Two-Year
Number Percent
Four-Year
Number Percent
Experimental
80
46
57.50
34
42.50
Comparison
80
56
70.00
24
30.00
Experimental
and
Comparison
Summary:
160
63.75
36.25
A substantial proportion of the newly-admitted
transfer students in both groups transferred from
a two-year college.
94
Class Standing
Table 16 shows the division of both groups by class standing
as determined by admission records.
TABLE 16
Class Standing
Class
Groups
No.
Freshman
No.
Experimental
23
28.75%
30
Comparison
11
13.75%
33
Summary:
Sophomore
No.
Junior
No.
Senior
37.50%
24
30.00%
3
3.75%
41.25%
34
42.50%
2
2.50%
The general concept of transfer students arriving as
juniors at the four-year institution is not supported by
these figures, particularly in the experimental group.
The table shows that many students enter as freshmen and
sophomores.
Enrollment by College
The enrollment by college was examined to see if the
experimental and comparison groups were as similar as possible.
This information is shown in Table 17.
95
TABLE 17
Enrollment by College
College
Experimental
Agriculture
Percentage
Comparison
Percentage
1
1.25%
0
20
25.00%
17
21.25%
Engineering
5
6.25%
5
6.25X
Education
1
1.25%
4
5.00%
Forestry
0
0
1
1.25%
Home Economics
2
2.50%
8
10.00%
42
52.50%
38
47.50%
Pharmacy
2
2.50%
0
Science
7
8.75%
7
Business
Liberal Arts
Summary:
0
0
8.75%
The general trends are somewhat similar for both groups.
There was an under-representation of certain colleges,
such as Education and Home Economics, in the
experimental group.
Entering Grade Point Averages (GPA's)
The previous college Grade Point Averages (CPA's) from the
entering experimental and comparison groups were calculated by the
Admissions Office and averaged for this study.
International
students could not be included because their records did not have
equivalent Grade Point Average (GPA) information.
is shown in Table 18.
The information
96
TABLE 18
Entering Grade Point Averages (GPA's)
Group
Entering GPA
Experimental
2.75
Comparison
2.94
t-test
significance
.004
Summary:
.05
The entering CPA for the comparison group was higher
than that of the experimental group.
Housing Status
The housing status of the experimental and comparison groups
was studied to determine if there were any differences between the
experimental and comparison groups.
This is detailed in Table 19.
97
TABLE 19
Housing Status
Type of Housing
Group
Off-Campus
Percent
On-Campus
Percent
Experimental
54
67.50
26
32.50
Comparison
65
81.25
15
18.75
Summary:
The experimental and comparison groups preferred offcampus housing, rather than living on campus.
Ethnic Groups
The student records were used to tabulate the percentages of
ethnic groups represented by the experimental and comparison
groups to determine if there was a difference.
is detailed in Table 20.
This information
98
TABLE 20
Ethnic Groups
Caucasian
Group
Hispanic
AfricanAmerican
Inter-
National
Experimental #
70
3
7
0
Comparison #
76
1
2
1
Experimental %
87.50
3.75
8.75
Comparison %
95.00
1.25
2.50
Summary:
0
1.25
The experimental group was self-selected; the study had
no control over which ethnic groups were represented in
the study. The comparison group was picked at random
for the study. The Hispanic students have a low percentage in both groups because the Hispanic student
population at Oregon State University is less than 1
percent. The African-American experimental group is
larger than the Hispanic and International groups because of its greater representation in the athletic
But, like the
department at Oregon State University.
Hispanic population, the African-American student
population is less than 1 percent of the total student
population, which accounts for its low percentage in
both the experimental and comparison groups.
99
Demographic Data Summary
The information gathered in this survey reveals a profile of
students who were likely to enroll in the extended transfer
student orientation course.
Much of the information did indicate
that the experimental and comparison groups were similar.
The demographic differences between the experimental and
comparison groups were minimal.
Statistically significant
differences were found in the area of origin.
Hypotheses Testing
The second objective of this study was to determine the
effect of the extended transfer student orientation course upon
factors related to student academic achievement.
Specifically,
does participation in the course affect the transfer students'
academic achievement?
1.
Null Hypothesis
The extended orientation course will have no
significant effect upon transfer students' decline in Grade
Point Average (CPA) during their first term after entering
Oregon State University.
100
The entering Grade Point Average (GPA) of the
experimental and comparison groups compared to that of their
first term (Fall 1988) at Oregon State University are
detailed the following tables.
TABLE 21
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the
Entering Grade Point Average (GPA) for the Experimental Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for
Entering GPA Compared to Fall 1988 GPA
Source:
df:
Sum of Squares:
Mean Square:
Between subjects
77
46.219
.6
Within subjects
78
21.875
.28
1
.024
treatments
77
21.85
155
68.093
residual
Total
Reliability Estimates forNote:
.284
Single treatment:
.533
All treatments:
2 cases deleted with missing values
78
2.756
.501
.057
F88
78
2.731
.796
.09
"
1
.025
1
.005
Significant at 5%
3.84 (the desired critical value)
.086 (Scheffe F-test) < 3.86
Except Ho (null hypotheses)
Type I error
Dunnett t:
Scheffe F-test:
Fisher PLSD:
Mean Diff.:
.363
Std. Error:
Std. Dev.:
Enter GPA
Enter GPA vs. F88
.7702
.086
.024
Mean:
Comparison:
.0005
2.14
Count:
Group:
P value:
F-test:
1
.086
1
.293
Significance level = 0.05
101
The analysis of variance showed a drop in Grade Point Average (GPA) of .025, thus the null hypothesis was retained that
transfer students' Grade Point Averages traditionally show a
decline during the first term after entering Oregon State
University.
TABLE 22
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the Entering
Grade Point Average (GPA) for the Comparison Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for Entering
GPA Compared to Fall 1988 GPA
Source:
df:
Between subjects
79
Within subjects
80
treatments
F-test:
46.887
.594
1.56
.0244
30.429
.38
9.513
.0028
3.27
1
residual
Total
Mean Square:
Sum of Squares:
3.27
79
27.158
159
77.315
Reliability Estimates for-
P value:
.344
All treatments:
Single Treatment:
.359
Count:
Mean:
Std. Day.:
Std. Error:
Enter GPA
80
2.939
.587
.066
F88
80
2.653
.77
.086
Group:
Mean Diff.:
Comparison:
Enter GPA vs. F88
I
" Significant at 5%
.286
I
.006 '
I
.095
Significance level = 0.05
(the desired critical value)
(Scheffe F-test) < 3.86
Except Ho (null hypotheses)
Type I error
3.84
.095
Scheffe F-test:
Fisher PLED:
.219
Dunnett t:
I
.308
102
The analysis of variance showed a drop in Grade Point Average (GPA) of .286, which supports the null hypothesis that transfer students' Grade Point Averages traditionally show a decline
during the first term after entering Oregon State University.
Summary:
The analysis of variance showed a drop in Grade Point
Average for the experimental and comparison groups.
The analysis
revealed that the experimental group showed less of a drop, compared to the comparison group.
The experimental group received
the treatment, the extended transfer student orientation course.
The drop in GPA for both groups does retain the null hypothesis
that transfer students' Grade Point Averages traditionally show a
decline during the first term after entering Oregon State University.
The analysis of variance (ANOVA) failed to reject Ho.
2.
Null Hypothesis
The extended orientation course will have no
significant effect upon transfer students' Grade Point
Averages (GPA's).
The academic years' (1988, 1989 and 1990) Grade Point
Averages (CPA's) for the experimental and comparison groups
are compared in the following tables (23 & 24, 25 & 26, and
27 & 28).
103
TABLE 23
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the Academic Year 1988
for the Comparison and Experimental Groups Compared
Comparison Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure
for GPA Academic Year 1988
Group
Count (n)
Mean (1)
S2
Totals
F88
80
2.653
.592
212.25
W89
79
2.572
.461
203.2
S89
76
2.745
.41
208.589
F
1.18589 < 3
Accept Ho
Significant at 5%
Significance level
0.05
TABLE 24
Experimental Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for
GPA Academic Year 1988
Group
Count (n)
Mean (i)
S2
Totals
F88
78
2.731
.633
213.00
W89
75
2.471
.872
185.34
S89
72
2.670
.514
192.24
2.07595 < 3
Accept Ho
Significant at 5%
Significance level
0.05
F
104
Summary:
The analysis of variance showed that the experimental
and the comparison groups did not show a difference in Grade Point
Averages (CPA's) for the 1988 academic year.
year 1988, the null hypothesis is retained.
For the academic
The student orienta-
tion course showed no effect when the experimental group was compared to the comparison group.
The analysis of variance (ANOVA)
failed to reject Ho.
TABLE 25
Analysis of Variance Summary Statistics for the Academic Year 1989
for the Experimental and Comparison Groups Compared
Comparison Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for
GPA Academic Year 1989
Count (n)
Mean (i)
S2
Totals
F89
75
2.755
.489
206.62
W90
73
2.842
.430
207.48
S90
72
2.848
.452
205.07
Group
F
.043899 < 3
Accept Ho
Significant at 5%
Significance level
0.05
105
TABLE 26
Experimental Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for
GPA Academic Year 1989
Count (n)
Group
Mean (X)
S2
Totals
F89
61
2.604
.578
158.826
W90
58
2.471
.747
143.304
S90
53
2.728
.775
144.590
1.31776 < 3
F
Accept Ho
Significant at 5%
0.05
Significance level
Summary:
The analysis of variance showed that the experimental
group had a lower Grade Point Average (GPA) for the academic year
1989.
tained.
For the academic year 1989, the null hypothesis is reThe student orientation course showed no effect when the
experimental group was compared to the comparison group.
analysis of variance (ANOVA) failed to reject Ho.
The
106
TABLE 27
Comparison Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for
GPA Academic Year 1990
S2
Totals
2.994
.415
149.68
59
2.257
1.805
133.15
40
3.094
.384
123.74
Count (n)
Mean (X)
F90
50
W91
S91
Group
1.46328 < 3
F
Accept Ho
Significance at 5%
Significance level
0.05
TABLE 28
Experimental Group
One Factor ANOVA-Repeated Measure for
CPA Academic Year 1990
S2
Totals
2.919
.635
102.16
30
2.949
.324
88.46
25
2.913
.703
72.83
Count (n)
Mean (i)
F90
35
W91
S91
Group
.01968 < 3.186
Accept Ho
Significant at 5%
Significance level
0.05
F
107
Summary:
The analysis of variance showed that the experimental
group's Grade Point Average in the third year after the treatment
was at mean 2.927, compared to the comparison group's at mean
2.78; which proves that the Grade Point Average (GPA) for transfer
students will gradually go upward naturally, not due to the extended orientation course.
The null hypothesis will be retained
because the analysis of variance (ANOVA) failed to reject Ho.
3.
Null Hypothesis
Participation in the extended transfer student
orientation course will have no effect upon transfer
retention.
The retention of the experimental and comparison
groups at Oregon State University are detailed in the
following tables (29 and 30).
108
TABLE 29
Retention of Experimental and Comparison Groups by Percent
Experimental
Percentage
Term
Comparison
Percentage
88
97.50
100.00
Winter 89
93.75
98.75
Spring 89
90.00
95.00
Fall
89
76.25
93.75
Winter 90
72.50
91.25
Spring 90
66.25
90.00
Fall
90
43.75
62.50
Winter 91
50.00
57.50
Spring 91
31.25
50.00
Fall
109
TABLE 30
Retention of Experimental and Comparison Groups
by Number of Students
Experimental
Term
Comparison
Fall
88
78
80
Winter
89
75
79
Spring
89
72
76
Fall
89
61
75
Winter
90
58
73
Spring
90
53
72
Fall
90
35
50
Winter
91
30
59
Spring
91
25
40
Academic Year Mean
Comparison
Difference
Academic Year
Experimental
1988
93.75%
97.91%
4.16
1989
71.66%
91.66%
20.00
1990
41.66%
56.66%
15.00
110
Summary:
The retention for the experimental group for academic
year 1988 showed 4.16 mean difference from the comparison group.
The treatment was given to the experimental group during Fall
1988.
The extended orientation course had a negative effect on
retention because retention for the experimental group was lower
than the comparison group.
The retention for the experimental group for academic year
1989 showed a 20 mean difference from the comparison group, which
shows that the extended orientation course had a negative effect
on retention during the second year.
The retention for the experimental group for academic year
1990 showed a 15 mean difference from the comparison group, which
shows that the extended orientation course had a negative effect
on retention during the third year.
Retain the null hypothesis for academic year 1988 because
there was no statistically significant difference.
The null
hypothesis will be retained for academic years 1988, 1989, and
1990 because the extended orientation course had a negative effect
on retention.
The tests failed to reject Ho.
The GPA's of over 3.50 and 3.57 for the experimental group
is shown in Table 31.
The GPA's of over 3.50 and 3.57 for the
comparison group is shown in Table 32.
111
TABLE 31
Percentage of Experimental Group with
Grade Point Averages (CPA's) Over 3.50 and 3.57
CPA 3.50
# Students
Term
GPA 3.57
# Students
88
14
17.90
11
13.75
Winter 89
14
18.67
11
13.90
Spring 89
12
16.67
9
11.80
89
8
13.10
8
10.70
Winter 90
9
15.50
8
11.00
Spring 90
10
18.90
11
15.30
Fall
90
11
31.40
8
16.00
Winter 91
5
16.70
5
8.50
Spring 91
8
32.00
7
17.50
Fall
Fall
112
TABLE 32
Percentage of Comparison Group with
Grade Point Averages (CPA's) Over 3.50 and 3.57
GPA 3.50
# Students
Term
X
GPA 3.57
# Students
X
Fall
88
10
12.80
7
8.75
Winter
89
6
8.00
4
5.06
Spring
89
9
12.50
8
10.53
Fall
89
10
16.39
6
8.00
Winter
90
13
22.40
9
12.33
Spring
90
13
24.50
11
15.28
Fall
90
12
34.30
11
22.00
Winter
91
7
23.30
5
8.47
Spring
91
11
44.00
10
25.00
Academic Year Mean
Experimental
3.57
3.50
Comparison
3.50
3.57
1988
17.75
13.15
11.10
8.10
6.67
5.05
1989
15.80
12.30
21.09
11.87
5.29
.43
1990
26.70
14.00
33.90
18.49
7.20
4.49
Academic Year
Difference
3.50
3.57
The GPA of below 2.00 for the experimental group is shown in
Table 33.
The GPA of below 2.00 for the comparison group is shown
in Table 34.
113
TABLE 33
Percentage of Experimental Group Below 2.00 (GPA)
Below 2.00
Term
# Students
Percent
Fall
88
14
17.90
Winter
89
23
30.70
Spring
89
13
18.05
Fall
89
9
14.75
Winter
90
15
25.90
Spring
90
9
16.98
Fall
90
2
5.71
Winter
91
1
3.30
Spring
91
3
12.00
Summary:
Fall 1988.
The treatment was given to the experimental group during
At the end of the academic year, the experimental
group had a larger mean of transfer students with a Grade Point
Average (GPA) of 3.50 and 3.57.
At the end of academic year 1989, the comparison group
showed a larger mean of transfer students with a Grade Point Average (GPA) of 3.5.
In the comparison group and experimental group,
there was a small difference at 3.57 (.43 difference).
114
At the end of academic year 1990, the comparison group
showed a larger mean of transfer students with a Grade Point
Average (GPA) of 3.50 and 3.57.
The treatment for the experimental group for academic year
1988, which was given during Fall 1988, showed that the treatment
did have an effect on Grade Point Averages, with a Grade Point
Average of 3.50 and 3.57 the year of the treatment.
TABLE 34
Percentage of Comparison Group below 2.00 (GPA)
Below 2.00
# Students
Percent
88
14
17.50
Winter 89
18
22.78
Spring 89
9
11.84
Fall
89
9
12.00
Winter 90
9
12.32
Spring 90
7
9.72
Fall
90
4
8.00
Winter 91
16
27.12
Spring 91
2
5.00
Term
Fall
115
Academic Year Mean
Academic Year
Experimental
Comparison
Difference
1988
54.60
44.20
10.40
1989
46.30
27.56
18.74
1990
7.00
13.37
6.37
Summary:
The experimental group showed a larger mean of transfer
students going on probation for academic year 1988, compared to
the comparison group.
For the academic year 1989, the experimental group showed a
larger mean of students going on probation, compared to the
comparison group.
For the academic year 1990, the experimental group showed
fewer students on probation than the comparison group.
(At Oregon State University, probation is when a student's
Grade Point Average drops below 2.0.)
116
Null Hypothesis
4.
The extended orientation course will have no effect
upon transfer student graduation rates.
The graduation rates of the experimental and
comparison groups are shown in Tables 35 and 36.
TABLE 35
Graduation Rates of Experimental Group Students
Year
# of Students
Percent of Fall 88 Group
1989
5
6.25
1990
11
13.75
1991
8
10.00
24
30.00
Total
TABLE 36
Graduation Rates of Comparison Group Students
Year
# of Students
Percent of Fall 88 Group
1989
1
1.25
1990
16
20.00
1991
19
23.75
Total
36
45.00
117
Summary:
At the end of academic year 1988, the experimental group
showed 80 percent more students graduating, compared to the comparison group.
The treatment was given to the experimental group
during Fall 1988, academic year 1988.
For the three year study,
the comparison group had one-third more students who graduated,
compared to the experimental group.
The extended orientation
course had no effect on graduation rates for the experimental
group.
The null hypothesis will be retained for the three-year
study.
The tests failed to reject Ho.
118
CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
The primary purpose of this study was to determine the effects of an extended transfer student orientation course on academic achievement.
The model components were transfer student de-
cline in Grade Point Average (GPA), transfer student Grade Point
Average (GPA), transfer student retention and transfer student
graduation rates.
The assessment of experimental and comparison
groups of newly admitted transfer students at Oregon State University was done after the Fall 1988 term, when the experimental
treatment--the extended transfer student orientation course--took
place.
Analyses of variance were the main statistical techniques
used to compare the two group responses.
The demographic data revealed that these transfer students
had many of the characteristics which have been shown to limit
student success.
Seventy to seventy-five percent of the transfer
student participants were the traditional ages of college students
(18-22 years old).
The class standing of the transfer students indicated that
many of the two-year transfer students were moving to the four-
119
year school without the associate degree.
In addition, many of
the four-year transfer students were transferring in their sophomore or junior years.
Most of the transfer students who enrolled in the extended
transfer student orientation course were in-state students.
In
addition, most of the transfer students who did not enroll in the
course were in-state students.
The majors of both groups were
similar.
In this study, the entering Grade Point Averages (CPA's) of
the experimental group were lower than those of the comparison
group.
The experimental group entered with a lower GPA than the
comparison group; it appeared that those transfer students recognized the need for help in order to be successful students.
The
marketing of the course was successful in attracting transfer students who needed the extended transfer student orientation course.
Hypotheses Testing
The primary objective of this study was to determine the
effect on academic achievement of the extended transfer student
orientation course.
The areas examined were the transfer student
decline in Grade Point Average (GPA), transfer student Grade Point
Average (GPA), transfer student retention and transfer student
graduation rates.
120
Decline in Grade Point Average
The experimental treatment showed a drop in Grade Point
Average (GPA) for the experimental and comparison groups after
their first term at Oregon State University.
The experimental
group showed less of a drop, compared to the comparison group.
The experimental group received the treatment, the extended
transfer student orientation course.
The drop in Grade Point
Average (GPA) for both groups did support the null hypothesis that
transfer students' Grade Point Averages (CPA's) traditionally show
a decline during the first term after entering Oregon State
University.
The treatment had no effect ameliorating decline in
Grade Point Average (GPA).
Grade Point Average (GPA)
The Grade Point Averages (GPA's) of the experimental and
comparison groups showed that both groups did not show a difference in academic year 1988.
The Grade Point Averages (GPA's) of
the experimental and comparison groups showed that the experimental group had a lower Grade Point Average (GPA) for the
academic year 1989.
The impact of the extended transfer student
orientation course on academic achievement did not help the
experimental group during its second year at Oregon State
University.
At the end of nine terms the analysis showed the
121
experimental group's Grade Point Average at mean 2.927, compared
to the comparison group's mean of 2.78; which demonstrates that
the Grade Point Average (GPA) for transfer students will gradually
go upward, although the Grade Point Average (GPA) going upward for
the experimental group was not due to the extended transfer
student orientation course.
Retention of Transfer Students
At the end of academic year 1988, the transfer students who
were enrolled in the extended transfer student orientation course
had a retention rate four percent lower than the transfer students
who did not enroll in the course.
At the end of academic year
1989, the transfer students enrolled in the course had a decline
in retention of 20 percent, compared to the transfer students who
did not enroll in the course.
At the end of academic year 1990,
the transfer students enrolled in the course had a decline in
retention of 15 percent, compared to the transfer students who did
not enroll in the course.
The retention of transfer students who
enrolled in the course showed a negative effect.
122
Transfer Student Graduation Rates
The three-year study demonstrated that the transfer students
not enrolled in the extended transfer student orientation course
showed one-third more graduating transfer students, compared to
the transfer students enrolled in the course.
The course showed
no positive effect on graduation rates for transfer students
enrolled in the course.
Conclusion
The transfer student GPA and retention was measured for
three years.
The course showed no positive effect on academic
achievement or retention for the transfer students enrolled in the
course.
In addition, pre-entry attributes, such as Grade Point
Average (GPA) and trend of academics, are important elements in
predicting student success; but not enough was known about the
transfer students at this institution (Oregon State University) to
control for such variables.
The study demonstrated that the grade
received in the course Fall 1988 helped the at-risk transfer
students to maintain Grade Point Averages (CPA's) of 2.00 and
above.
123
After the term, participants in the extended transfer
student orientation course made comments which suggested that they
had made faster inroads into the academic and social systems of
the university.
course.
The comments were made at the end of the Fall 88
The implication is that the participants made friends in
the extended orientation course and had a close relationship with
at least one faculty member--the section instructor.
The
following are comments made by the transfer students who were
enrolled in the course.
The comment introduction and summary of
findings were written by Dr. Robert Rice of Oregon State
University at the end of Fall 1988.
Written Comments From Participants
A final study used a qualitative analysis of the
Each of
participants' written comments of the course.
the participants in the course were asked to submit
weekly journals of their first term experiences at
Oregon State University. The following statements
have been derived from comments in the journals and
student reactions to a question concerning their
assessment of the HIED 202 course. The comments
reflect statements from 72 of the 80 students; some
students had several statements worthy of note.
I thought I saw a change in the caring depart1.
The students in this
ment because of the HIED class.
I also saw a
class really wanted to help each other.
The kind I was expecting
different kind of teacher.
It is nice to have a teacher who
five years before.
cares and really goes out to help students.
My education should go a lot smoother and should
be a happier ride because of this course.
2.
124
There are more people here at OSU who are
3.
willing to help you than I thought.
I
This class has helped me in several ways.
feel comfortable here at OSU; I feel like I know the
system and how it works and I think this class has
helped me get to that point.
4.
I feel this class has helped me to develop some
5.
key friendships and I have become more involved in
I already feel at home here in
some super activities.
Corvallis.
The teacher of the HIED class has been a friend
I am really glad that I
and an assistant for me.
decided to take this class because now I feel like a
real college student.
6.
I feel so close to the instructor and students
Everyone has been so sensitive and
in the HIED class.
caring.
7.
The HIED class has been wonderful.
It has
8.
helped me to feel more comfortable with my
surroundings. I think this class is a wonderful
addition for transfer students.
I have become so enchanted by the friendly,
9.
helpful people here at OSU that I have decided to stay
This HIED class has really helped me to sort
at OSU.
out my feelings, the instructor has been our friend
and advisor.
Besides meeting a lot
I enjoyed the HIED class.
of new people, I learned a lot about the campus.
It
helped me a lot with my academic development.
10.
The best thing to happen to me as a result of
this course was the gaining back of my confidence.
As
a class we didn't talk about confidence, but we examined study habits and personality traits. When this
picture of myself was painted, I didn't like what I
This prompted me to take a look at what the
saw.
I'm back on track and thank this class
problem was.
and myself for it.
11.
125
Because of the HIED 202 class, I'm now in a
state of mind where I can set goals for myself and
For the past year and a half
take them seriously.
this had been missing, replaced by false commitment
and apathy.
12.
I
The HIED course has been very helpful to me.
13.
hope that people will continue to take this course and
use it to its fullest potential.
The orientation class sped up my knowledge of
OSU and all it has to offer. It helped me to adapt
quickly to the campus.
14.
The HIED class helped me to get a jump on a more
successful stay here at OSU.
15.
I highly recommend that all transfers take the
You get some good advice
transfer orientation class.
about school and lots of encouragement.
16.
I found the HIED class to be very supportive.
It was comforting to know other students were facing
the same problems and the class helped me to meet some
very good friends.
17.
Our instructor in the HIED class really cared
He
about how we were doing socially and academically.
was willing to help us or find us help.
18.
The transfer class made it easier for me to cope
19.
with the lonely feelings I had moving up here. The
relaxed atmosphere made it easier to talk about our
problems.
I would recommend this class to everyone.
It
20.
will help you adjust to the college atmosphere 100%.
It is very hard to be a college student if you
don't know what or where your resources are. This
class really helped to identify the key resources.
21.
22.
This class helped me to get organized and helped
me to deal with the stress that I was feeling.
126
I really enjoyed the HIED class because it was a
time to meet with others who were feeling just like me
at time-we all shared common stress and the class
helped to bring us together and help each other with
that stress.
23.
Over-all this class made the difference between
24.
be forging ahead when I considered dropping out.
The feeling of anonymity in a new town and
sometimes overpowering environment was some how
balanced by this class where people are allowed to be
people without the demand of "heady" expectations.
25.
The HIED class--the small group setting was so
supportive, it was a place to come where I was seen as
an individual rather than an unknown face in a sea of
unknown faces.
26.
The crucial element of the HIED class for me was
the beautiful personality of the instructor-his
genuine nature, openness, and willingness to share his
experiences and sense of caring was great.
27.
The HIED class is a time to get in touch with
28.
yourself and find some direction in your life.
The HIED class was a place where you feel people
care and you belong to a group where you can make some
real friendships.
29.
The HIED class is an experience where you don't
have to go out and worry about seeking help-it's all
right here for you.
30.
31.
The class was very helpful, I'm sorry that it is
over.
The HIED class is the best course that I took
this term.
32.
I believe the HIED class has done more for me
It thought me a lot of techthan any other class.
niques that I now use in my education.
33.
The HIED class has helped me to improve my
system of study.
34.
127
The HIED class is a very good class for not only
I hope that each person
transfers, but all students.
in the class has benefitted in a personal sense in as
much as I believe that I have.
35.
36.
The HIED class has helped me to gain important
knowledge about the university, knowledge of other
students, and experience having a class that involves
input from sources other than teachers.
37.
The class was stress free and a good way to meet
I'd recommend it to anyone transferring to
people.
OSU.
What I liked about the HIED class? It was
relaxed, comfortable, helpful, interesting, and a
chance to meet people who were supportive.
38.
I would highly recommend the transfer
39.
orientation class to any new student.
Our group in the HIED class became very close
and this made it easier to talk about and to work out
our problems. I really enjoyed this class.
40.
The instructor in the HIED class was the best
thing to happen to me during the first term at OSU.
41.
The HIED class is a good idea and is superb in
helping students.
42.
I feel that the HIED class has really helped me
to feel more comfortable with OSU. The instructor is
an inspiration to me. He turned out to be a friend
I think this class is a very good
and an advisor.
43.
idea.
I think that the main thing I recommend new
transfer students to do is take the Transfer OrientaIt is a very beneficial and informative
tion course.
44.
class.
The HIED 202x transfer orientation course helped
me to deal with the stress of coming to OSU, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
45.
128
The HIED 202x class helped me with my knowledge
of the campus, with my studying, with my anxiety, and
it helped me to make new friends.
46.
I thought the HIED 202x class might be boring
47.
but it turned out to be my favorite class.
It was
interesting, helpful, informative, and a great
class!!!
The HIED instructor was a friend and a good
model for us to follow.
48.
49.
The HIED class is very good.
50.
I feel that the HIED class has been long overdue
I am very surprised that it has never been
at OSU.
It has given me a chance to learn
offered before.
about the university and it has been a tremendous help
in locating campus resources.
I feel that because of this class that I am
51.
better prepared for OSU than a freshman or other
transfer student.
This class has taken the handicap out of being a
transfer student.
52.
I thought the HIED class was well organized and
I learned a lot from it.
53.
54.
I'm really glad that I took the transfer class
because it helped me feel more a part of the
university.
I
I really enjoyed the transfer class.
55.
particularly liked the personal relationships of our
group.
I feel that the HIED class is an extremely
It gives transfer students an
important class.
It
opportunity to meet others in our situation.
helped me to know myself and to know how to deal with
others.
56.
The instructor of the transfer group did a
fantastic job. I really enjoyed the camaraderie.
57.
58.
The HIED class was perfect in all categories, it
really helped in my commuting to OSU.
129
Working in a group within the HIED class was a
59.
They all knew exactly what I was
real plus.
experiencing.
It was a place to relax and learn, to meet some
60.
nice people and learn about the internal workings of
the university.
I gain confidence and more self-esteem for the
61.
HIED course. I feel that I can make educated
decisions instead of guesses as a result of taking the
I liked the moral support and specific
course.
information presented.
I liked meeting and learning from the
experiences of the other students.
62.
I have a much better understanding of the depth
63.
and breadth of services and resources at OSU.
The HIED provided me with an opportunity to have
a strong relationship with my classmates-this was
valuable to me.
64.
The HIED class provided me with a support group
It gave me a
for older than average student problems.
more realistic view of the campus, its role, functions
and how I fit in.
65.
The HIED class gave me the chance to meet new
66.
people and explore the resources at OSU.
The HIED class gave me the chance to meet other
67.
older than average students and this helped to make
the campus a more friendly place.
68.
The HIED class was great, the biggest strength
was the instructor. His counseling and help were
extremely helpful and he gave me a push in the right
direction, something I haven't got in a long time.
69.
The HIED class gave me the chance to make some
friends.
It also gave me a chance to learn valuable
study tips and how to plan my time more effectively.
The HIED class gave me the freedom to be me and
the content of the course was very good.
70.
130
The class helped me to deal with the anxieties
of being a new student in a new place.
71.
The HIED class was a place where you could go
and discuss things and feel comfortable. We got to
know others and we were treated as unique people and
not just another face in the crowd.
72.
73.
I really enjoyed the HIED class.
The HIED instructor really made me feel
74.
The other students in the
comfortable about OSU.
class were of great help and support and I enjoyed
learning about myself and theirs.
The HIED class was a very open, warm, and
friendly atmosphere. I really enjoyed the class
discussions especially on dealing with the stress of
college life.
75.
You got to know others,
The HIED class was fun.
obtain some friendships, and it was a place where I
could go if I had a question and I wasn't sure where
76.
to start.
I enjoyed the HIED class. The instructor was
good, likeable, and the class was so personal.
77.
In the HIED class I learned how to deal with
78.
people in new situations. The instructor was
excellent and concerned himself with his students.
The HIED class helped me to relax and gave me
some insights into how others perceived me and my new
environment.
79.
The HIED class gave me a better understanding of
80.
how OSU is operated and I enjoyed relating to other
student problems and understanding their needs.
I enjoyed the atmosphere of the HIED 202x class.
I also enjoyed working with the other students and the
instructor.
81.
I enjoyed the small group atmosphere of the HIED
82.
class because it allow you to feel closer to the
students and the instructor. You don't feel like just
another number.
131
83.
I feel that the HIED class is a very strong one.
I enjoyed the lectures, discussions, and guest
speakers of the HIED class.
84.
I liked the instructor's attitude in the class.
85.
You are given freedom to talk and discuss issues in
this course.
I enjoyed the atmosphere of the HIED class, I
could be open with the instructor and with my
classmates.
86.
Summary of Findings
Participation in the HIED 202x has profound effects
upon transfer student academic performance, reactions
to college, and study habits and attitude development.
Moreover, testimony from student participants clearly
points to a strong favorable reaction and support for
The course would appear to have a trementhe course.
dous value in enhancing student awareness of the rules
and regulations of OSU, in fostering significantly
more student/faculty involvement, in facilitating more
favorable views of the campus climate, in promoting
positive impressions of the forms of instruction at
OSU, and in stimulating more awareness and use of the
counseling and advisement services at OSU.
The content and methodology within the course produced
significant gains in the over-all study habits and
attitudes of the student participants as more than 45%
of the students increased their study habit ability by
The course clearly helped students to utilize
50%.
their time more effectively, to change many of their
procrastination habits, and to look more favorably
upon the role of their instructors.
The most intriguing findings of the study were in the model
component of Grade Point Average (GPA), which is not examined for
two-year and four-year transfer students at the same time.
Per-
haps the conclusions which have been drawn from data collection on
Grade Point Averages (CPA's) and retention rates should also focus
132
on personal motivation to succeed in order to understand why some
students persevere at an institution of higher education.
Recommendations for Further Research
This study was conducted on the first extended transfer
student orientation course taught at Oregon State University, and
the course was adapted from courses taught to freshmen.
A repli-
cation of the extended transfer student orientation course and its
assessment would be needed to confirm these findings and to make
broader inferences.
A future study comparing freshmen and trans-
fer participants in such courses could be done to confirm the
similarities and any differences found in other studies.
This study did not examine the social system.
The extended
transfer student orientation course itself should be modified to
provide the formal and informal components of the social system.
The social needs of transfer students is the need to fit into the
Oregon State University environment.
The number of contact hours
should be increased or spread out over more than one term; I would
suggest three terms.
The formal academic system experiences, such
as concentration on academic skill, should be added to the content
of the course.
133
The effect of the course, as it relates to the overall issue
of retention, should be studied in a longitudinal project.
The
persistence of transfer students at Oregon State University, their
academic performance and the perceptions they have of faculty and
the institution could be assessed at a later date for both experimental and comparison groups.
Other colleges and universities could replicate this project
on transfer students, as their transfer student populations may
differ from this studied group.
In addition, specific sub-groups
could be targeted, such as older-than-average, female and minority
students.
Different types of transfer students, such as articu-
lated, non-traditional and reverse transfer students, could also
be identified and studied.
Controls related to pre-entry
variables of gender, GPA, educational background, entering GPA or
type of former college could be used.
A study of at-risk transfer
students would enable colleges and universities in the future to
provide an environment where at-risk transfer students can fulfill
their educational goals.
This study and further research will enable colleges and
universities in the future to provide an environment conducive to
a higher percentage of two-year and four-year transfer students
fulfilling their educational goals.
In conclusion, I will say that the more that is known about
the transfer student at Oregon State University, the more fully
they will be served.
134
REFERENCES
Aitken, N.C. (1982). College student performance, satisfaction
and retention: Specification and estimation of a structural
model. Journal of Higher Education, 53(1):32-50.
American Association of Community and Junior Colleges and American
Council on Education; National Center for Academic Achievement and Transfer (1990). Good Practices in Transfer
Education: Report from a Survey Conducted by the American
Association of Community and Junior Colleges and the
National Center for Academic Achievement and Transfer.
Transfer Working Papers, Volume 1, Number
Washington, DC.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
3, October 1990.
ED324 044.)
Setting the National
American Council on Education (1991).
A Policy
Agenda: Academic Achievement and Transfer.
Statement and Background Paper about Transfer Education.
American Council on Education, Washington, DC, National
(ERIC
Center for Academic Achievement and Transfer.
Document Reproduction Service No. ED336 136.)
Two-year comparison of
Anderson, E.F., and Polillo, P.J. (1987).
transfer and native student progress (Research Memorandum
Illinois: Illinois University Urbana Office,
No. 87-5).
School and College Relations.
Two-year comparison of
Anderson, E.F., and Polillo, P.J. (1988).
transfer and native student progress (Research Memorandum
Illinois: Illinois University Urbana Office,
No. 88-5).
School and College Relations.
Angel, D., and Bannena, A. (1991).
Colleges, 74(Summer, 1991).
New Directions for Community
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
Inc.
"Personal and Environmental Factors
Astin, A.W. (1964).
Associated with College Dropouts among High Aptitude
Students." Journal of Educational Psychology, 55(August,
1964): 219-27.
Impact of dormitory living on students.
Astin, A.W. (1973).
Educational Record, 54:204-210.
135
Astin, A.W. (Ed.) (1974). New directions for institutional
research: Evaluating institutions for accountability.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
San
Astin, A.W. (1975A). Preventing students from dropping out.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
San
Astin, A.W. (1975B). Dropouts. Stopouts. and Persisters: A
Los Angeles: Laboratory For Research on
National Profile.
Higher Education, University of California.
Astin, A.W. (1978). Four critical years: Effects of college on
San Francisco: Josseybeliefs, attitudes, and knowledge.
Bass, Inc.
Babbitt, C.E., and Burbach, H.J. (1985). Women and the college
environment: A study of organizational satisfaction,
Sociological Focus,
compliance, and academic achievement.
18(1):37-47.
"Personality Patterns and
Barger, B., and Hall, E. (1964).
Achievement in College." Educational and Psychological
Measurement, 24:339-346.
"The Community College System in North
Barringer, B. (1990).
Carolina: A Silver Anniversary History, 1963-1988."
Community College Review, 17(4):52-59.
Bean, J., and Metzner, B.S. (1985). A conceptual model of
nontraditional undergraduate student attrition.
Review of
Educational Research, 55(4):485-540.
Beck, M.C. (1980). Decreasing the risk of high risk students.
Community and Junior College Journal, 41(1):4-6.
Bender, L.W. (1991).
"Making Transfer and Articulation Work."
AGB Reports, 33(Sep.-Oct.):5, 17-20.
"The Devaluation of Transfer: Current
Bernstein, A. (1989).
Explanations and Possible Causes." New Directions for
Community Colleges, 14(2):31-40.
Brubacher, J.S., and Rudy, W. (1976). Higher education in
transition: A history of American colleges and universities,
1636-1976.
(3rd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.
Buckley, H. (1971). A comparison of freshman and transfer expectations.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 12:186-188.
136
Campbell, D.T., and Stanley, J.C. (1966). Experimental and QuasiExperimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally
and Company.
"Adoption of the Intersegmental General
Cepeda, R. (1991).
Education Transfer Curriculum." Discussed as Agenda Item 15
at a meeting of the Board of Governors of California
Community Colleges (Sacramento, CA, January 10-11, 1991).
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED326 271.)
"Transfer: A Plan for the
Cepeda, R., and Nelson, K. (1991).
Future." Discussed as Agenda Item 7 at a meeting of the
Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges
(ERIC Document
(Sacramento, CA, November 14-15, 1991).
Reproduction Service No. ED337 225.)
Chickering, A.W. (1969).
Jossey-Bass.
Education and identity.
San Francisco:
Chickering, A.W. (1974). Commuting versus resident students:
Overcoming educational inequities of living off campus.
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
San
Cohen, A.M., and Brawer, F.B. (1982). The American community
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
college.
Community Colleges Where America Goes to College (1991). "A
Summary of Selected National Data Pertaining to Community,
Technical and Junior Colleges." The American Association of
Community/Junior Colleges; Association of Community College
Trustees; National Council for Marketing and Public
Relations.
Cope, R.G. and Hannah, W. (1975). Revolving College Doors: The
Causes and Conseauences of Dropping Out. Stopping Out, and
Transferring. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
University of Puget Sound, American AssociaCopeland, S. (1986).
tion of Colleges/Mellon Foundation Transfer Student Project:
1985-6 Report. New York: Association of American Colleges.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED273 332.)
Cross, P. (1981). Adults as learners: Increasing participation
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
and facilitating learning.
Demitroff, J.F. (1974). "Student persistence."
University, 49:553-7.
College and
137
Dempsey, J. (1986). Higher education linkage program: A two-year/
four-year transfer project in cooperation with Pima
Progress
Community College District and Cochise College.
New
York:
Association
of
American
Colleges.
Report 1985-6.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED270 155.)
Higher education linkage program: A two-year/
Desler, J. (1986).
four-year transfer project in cooperation with Pima
Progress
Community College District and Cochise College.
Report 1985-6. New York: Association of American Colleges.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED270 155.)
Statistics: The Exploration and
Devore, J., and Peck, R. (1986).
San Francisco: West Publishing Company.
Analysis of Data.
Donato, D. (1973).
Environment.
Junior College Transfers and a University
Journal of College Student Personnel, 14:254-
259.
Suicide (J. Spauldy and G. Simpson, Trans.).
Durkheim, E. (1961).
Glencoe, NY: The Free Press.
Enhancing Transfer Effectiveness, (1990). A study for the
National Effective Transfer Consortium. American
Association of Community and Junior Colleges, Washington,
DC.
Farland, R.W., and Anderson, C. (1989). Transfer and Articulation
with Four-Year Colleges and Universities: A Report.
California Community Colleges, Sacramento, Office of the
Discussed as Agenda Item Number 4 at a meeting
Chancellor.
of the Board of Governors of the California Community
Colleges (Los Angeles, CA, March 9-10, 1989).
Feldman, K.A., and Newcomb, T.M. (1969). The Impact of College on
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Students.
"The freshman year experience."
Gardner, J. (1986).
University, 61:261-274.
College and
"The freshman seminar course:
Gordon, U., and Grites, T. (1984).
Helping students succeed." Journal of College Student
Personnel, 25:315-320.
Persistence and the relationship to academic
Graham, S.W. (1987).
Community/
performance measures: A longitudinal study.
Junior College Quarterly of Research and Practice, 2:75-84.
138
Grosset, J.M. (1991). Research in Higher Education: Air Journal
of the Association for Institutional Research, 32(2)(April,
1991). New York: Human Sciences Press, Inc.
The Branding Iron, May, 1992. University
Hall, L. (1992).
The National College Newspaper, University of Wyoming.
Handel, D.D. (1984). Student attitudes about the transfer
process: A comparison among three student populations.
NASPA Journal, 3:13-21.
Heilbrun, A.B.
Dropout.
,
"
Jr. (1964).
"Personality Factors in College
Journal of Applied Psychology, 49:1-7.
"A 6-Year Longitudinal Analysis of Transfer
Holahan, C.K. (1983).
Student Performance and Retention." Journal of College
Student Personnel, 24:4, 305-10.
Holland, J.L. (1973). Making Vocational Choices: A Theory of
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Careers.
House, J.S. (1981). Work stress and social support.
Addison-Wesley.
Reading, MA:
James Madison University (1989).
The Academic Performance of
Transfers from Virginia's Public Two-Year Institutions at
James Madison University. James Madison University,
Harrisonburg, VA.
Johnson, N. (1987).
"Academic factors that affect transfer
student persistence." Journal of College Student Personnel,
28:323-329.
Journal of The Freshman Year Experience, Volume 2, Number 1
(1990).
National Center for the Study of The Freshman Year
Experience, The University of South Carolina.
Kintzer, F.C., and Wattenbarger, J.L. (1985). The Articulation/Transfer Phenomenon: Patterns and Directions. American
Association of Community and Junior Colleges, National
Center for Higher Education, Washington, DC.
Knoell, D.M., and Medsker, L.L. (1964). Articulation between twoyear and four-year colleges. Berkeley University of
California, Center for the Study of Higher Education, 112 p.
(U.S. Office of Education. Cooperative Research Project no.
2167.)
139
Examination of Community College
Kominski, C.A. (1990).
Transfers, Oregon State University. Oregon State University
Institutional Research and Planning, Office of Budgets and
Planning, Corvallis, OR.
The perceived orientation
Kramer, G.L., and Washburn, R. (1983).
needs of new students. Journal of College Student
Personnel, 4:311-319.
Lee, B.S. (1982). The Reverse Transfer Student: An Emerging
Sacramento, CA: Los Rios Community College
Population.
District and Northern California Cooperative Institutional
Research Group.
Lenning, O. (1977). Assessing student progress in academic
In L.L. Baird (Ed.), New directions for
achievement.
community colleges: Assessing student academic and social
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
progress, 18:24-28.
Lenning, 0., Beal, P., and Sauer, K. (1980). Attrition and
Boulder, CO:
Retention: Evidence for actions and research.
National Center for Higher Education Management Systems.
Lewin, K. (1935). A Dynamic Theory of Personality.
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
New York:
Characteristics of
Lunneborg, A.E., and Lunneborg, P.W. (1976).
University Graduates Who Were Community College Transfers.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 17:61-65.
Student ratings of faculty: A reprise.
McKeachie, W.K. (1979).
Academe, 65:384-397.
Missouri Coordinating Board for Higher Education (1987). Credit
Transfer: Guidelines for Student Transfer and Articulation
among Missouri Colleges and Universities. Missouri
Coordinating Board for Higher Education, Jefferson City, MO.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED297 677.)
Monroe Community College (MCC) (1989).
Rochester, NY.
Reports-Research (143).
Dropouts from higher education: Path analysis
Munro, B.H. (1981).
of a national sample. American Education Research Journal,
18:133-141.
Explorations in Personality.
Murray, H.A. (1938).
Oxford University Press.
New York:
140
Nafziger, D.H., Holland, J.L., and Gottfredson, G.C. (1975).
Student - College congruency as a predictor of satisfaction.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 22(2):132-139.
Nelson, J.H. (1966). Guidelines for articulation.
Journal, 36:24-26.
Junior College
Okon, A.M. (1986). Kalamazoo College Final Report on Participation in AAC/Mellon Transfer Project. Kalamazoo
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
College, MI.
ED270 156.)
Oregon State University, Institutional Research and Planning,
Office of Budgets and Planning (1987). Oregon State
University, Corvallis, OR.
Oregon State University, Office of the Registrar (1990).
State University, Corvallis, OR.
Oregon
Owen, J.A. (1991). A Comparative Analysis of the Academic
Performance and Graduation Rates of Freshman and Transfer
AIR 199: Annual Forum Paper. Paper presented at
Students.
the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional
Research (31st, San Francisco, CA, May 26-29, 1991). (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED336 022.)
"An Approach to the
Pace, R.C., and Stern, G.C. (1958).
Measurement of Psychological Characteristics of College
Environments." Journal of Educational Psychology, 49:269277.
Learning and
Palmer, J., Carlinger, G., and Romen, T.L. (1978).
evaluations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 70:855-863.
Bolstering the community college transfer
Palmer, J. (1986).
function. Los Angeles, California: Office of Educational
Research and Improvement.
"Student-Faculty
Pascarella, E.T., and Terenzini, P.T. (1979A).
Informal Contact and College Persistence: A Further
Investigation." Journal of Educational Research, 72:214218.
"Interactive
Pascarella, E.T., and Terenzini, P.T. (1979B).
Influence in Spady's and Tinto's Conceptual Models of
College Dropout." Sociology of Education, 52:197-210.
141
Pascarella, E.T. (1980).
college outcomes."
50:545-595.
"Student-faculty informal contact and
Review of Educational Research,
Pascarella, E.T. (Ed.) (1982).
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Studying student attrition.
Payne, J., Ridenour, J., and Wood, D. (1988). A Review
Academic Performance and Achievement of Students.
ring from Oregon Community Colleges to the Oregon
Higher Education.
Eugene, OR: Office of Academic
Oregon Chancellor's Office.
San
of the
TransferSystem of
Affairs,
Pounds, H.R., and Anderson, B. (1989). Undergraduate Student
Transfer Report Summary.
University System of Georgia,
Atlanta, GA.
Rendon, L.I. (1986).
"A Comprehensive Strategy to Examine and
Address Transfer Education." Paper presented at a Conference of the Texas Coordinating Board (Austin, TX, April 16,
1986).
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED270 191.)
Rice, R., and Thomas, W. (1989).
"The Effects of Various Types of
Orientation Programming upon Freshman Academic Performance
and Reaction to College." Paper presented at the Western
Regional Conference of the Freshman Year Experience;
Irvine, CA; January 29-31, 1989.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED323 443.)
Riesman, D. (1981). On higher education: The academic enterprise
in an era of rising student consumerism. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Riverside Community College District, California Office of
Research and Planning (1991). Riverside Community College
Students Who Transferred to the California State University.
Riverside Community College District, California Office of
Research and Planning, Riverside, CA.
Roberts, K.C., and Warren, E. (1984). Urban Community Colleges
Transfer Opportunities Program, Ford Foundation Project
Report.
South Mountain Community College, Phoenix, AZ; Ford
Foundation, New York, NY.
(ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. ED255 262.)
Robinson, L. (1967).
"Relation of Student Persistence in College
to Satisfaction with Environmental Factors." Unpublished
Doctoral Dissertation, University of Arkansas.
142
Teaching and counseling older college students.
Roelf, P. (1975).
Findings, 2(1):129-136.
Sheldon, S., and Grafton, C. (1982). Everything you always wanted
to know about California Community College students.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 1(3):14-16.
Southern Regional Education Board (1987). Access to Quality
Undergraduate Education in the Two-Year College: A Report to
the Southern Regional Education Board by Its Commission for
Southern Regional Education Board,
Educational Quality.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
Atlanta, GA.
ED285 620.)
Spady, W.G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interInterchange, 4:64-85.
disciplinary review and synthesis.
Swain, R., and Degus, R. (1988). Options and opportunities: A
study of orientation for Monroe Community College.
Rochester: Monroe Community College.
"The Relation of
Terenzini, P., and Pascarella, E.T. (1978).
Students' Precollege Characteristics and Freshman-Year
Experience to Voluntary Attrition." Research in Higher
Education, 9:347-366.
"Toward the ValidaTerenzini, P., and Pascarella, E.T. (1980).
tion of Tinto's Model of College Student Attrition: A Review
of Recent Studies." Research in Higher Education, 12:27180.
The Spotlight On The Transfer Function: A National Study of State
Policies and Practices (1990). Bender, L.W. (Ed.).
American Association of Community and Junior College,
National Center for Higher Education, Washington, DC.
Dropout from higher education: A theoretical
Tinto, V. (1975).
Review of Educational
synthesis of recent research.
Research, 45:89-125.
Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and
Tinto, V. (1987).
cures of student attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Transfer Education: California Community Colleges (1984).
Sacramento, CA: Office of the Chancellor, California
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
Community Colleges.
ED250 025.)
143
The freshman year
Uperagt, L., and Gardner, J. (1989).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
experience.
U.S. Department of Education (1977). National Longitudinal Survey
of High School Graduate of 1972. Washington, D.C.: National
Center of Educational Statistics.
Survey of Two- and Four-Year
U.S. Department of Education (1992).
College Enrollment. Washington, D.C.: National Center of
Educational Statistics.
Volkwein, J. (1986). Student-Faculty Relationships and IntelHigher
lectual Growth among Transfer Students. Journal of
Education, 57:4, 413-30.
Wiersma, W. (1969).
introduction.
Research Methods in Education: An
Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Company.
Wilkie, C., and Kuckuck, S. (1989). A longitudinal study of the
effects of a freshman seminar. Journal of the Freshman Year
Experience, 1(1):7-16.
Willingham, W. (1974). Transfer students and the public interest.
In College Transfer: Working Papers and Recommendations from
the Airlie House Conference. Washington, D.C.: Association
Transfer Group.
Witten, C.H. (1970). The impact of innovation: Orientation and
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
student values.
ED041 350.)
Wright, R. (1990).
Performance.
ED317 242.)
The Predictability of College Transfer Student
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
APPENDICES
DIRECTORY OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES IN OREGON
Institution. Location. Administrative Officer
Blue Mountain Community College
2410 NW Carden Avenue
PO Box 100
Pendleton, OR 97801-0100
Phone: 276-1260
Mr. Ronald L. Daniels, President
Central Oregon Community College
2600 NW College Way
Bend, OR 97701-5998
Phone: 382-6112
Dr. Frederick H. Boyle, President (to July 1990)
Dr. Robert Bather, President (July 1990- )
Chemeketa Community College
4000 Lancaster Drive NE
PO Box 14007
Salem, OR 97309-5009
Phone: 399-5000
Dr. William Segura, President
Clackamas Community College
19600 S Molalla Avenue
Oregon City, OR 97045
Phone: 657-8400
Dr. John Keyser, President
Clatsop Community College
1653 Jerome
Astoria, OR 97103
Phone: 325-0910
Mr. Phil L. Bainer, President (to July 1990)
Dr. Doreen Dailey, President (July 1990- )
*Columbia Gorge Community College
300 E 4th Street
The Danes, OR 97058
Phone: 296-6182
Mr. William E. Bell, President
Portland Community College
12000 SW 49th Avenue
Portland, OR 97219
Phone: 244-6111
Dr. Daniel F. Moriarty, President
Lane Community College
4000 E 30th Avenue
Eugene, OR 97405
Phone: 747-4501
Dr. Jerry Moskus, President
Rogue Community College
3345 Redwood Highway
Grants Pass, OR 97526
Phone: 479-5541
Dr. Harvey Bennett, President
Linn-Benton Community College
6500 SW Pacific Boulevard
Albany, OR 97321-3774
Phone: 928-2361
Mr. Jon Carnahan, President
Southwestern Oregon Community College
1988 Newmark
Coos Bay, OR 97420
Phone: 888-2525
Dr. Robert Barber, President (to July 1990)
Mt. Hood Community College
26000 SE Stark
Gresham, OR 97030
Phone: 667-6422
Dr. Paul Kreider, President
Tillamook Bay Community College
Service District
6385 Tillamook Avenue
Bay City, OR 97107
Phone: 377-2765
Mr. Roy B. Mason, President
Oregon Coast Community College
Service District
332 SW Coast Highway
Newport, OR 97365
Phone: 265-2283
Dr. Robert Costi, President
Treasure Valley Community College
650 College Boulevard
Ontario, OR 97914
Phone: 889-6493
Dr. Glenn E. May le, President
Treaty Oak CCSD became Columbia Gorge Community College August 1989.
Umpqua Community College
Box 967
Roseburg, OR 97470
Phone: 440-4600
Dr. James Kraby, President
eqwnloo,
// /
/ // / / /
/ / / / / // / / // / /
/////////////////
// / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
/ / / // // / / / / / / / / /
//////
/////////
////////
///////////
////////,//////////
///////.//////////
/
/.//////////
///////////////
////'//////>>
////// .///
////// ///
/
I
I.
/////////.
VMODBA,A
M011011 ", etPlewn
OL
upoun
c4
6
L
0
II
zl
Cl
51
WI POOH
106110 1103
ONIPAd
snood
uuISaflO5 .0e.0
flun"L AVA011
Oftodwn
4